I^5^W 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


THE 

EARLY    ENGLISH    DISSENTERS 

IN  THE  LIGHT   OF   RECENT   RESEARCH 
(1550— 1641) 


VOLUME   I 


CAMBRIDGE    UNIVERSITY   PRESS 

aoillron  :  FETTER  LANE,    E.G. 

C.   F,   CLAY,   Manager 


M 

i.'i 

in 

CFliinburfl!) :    loo,  PRINCES  STREET 

IScrlin:    A.  ASHER  AND  CO. 

fLefpjffl:    F.  A.   BROCKHAUS 

l^ebJ  lorft:    G.   P.   PUTNAM'S  SONS 

JSomfiaa  anti  CBlculta:    MACMILLAN  AND  CO.,  Ltd. 


All  rights  reserved 


iSAN^OL 
■  ^SOME*f    • 

oj  counter^ 
popfen, 
aga^fttJ^epejJplent 

oftbe^lnabap^    ,• 
tilled  neto'^  C/   //y-  V  a 

Utth 

out 

ofiati 

taieton,Se»onopiBf» 

«^    (::)    -co 


Title-page.     {Facsimile.)     Date  1548. 
See  Vol.  I.,  page  55. 


THE 

EARLY  ENGLISH   DISSENTERS 

IN  THE  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 
(1550— 1641) 

BY 

CHAMPLIN    BURRAGE 

Hon.  M.A.  (Brown  University),  B.Litt.  (Oxon.) 

IN   TWO   VOLUMES 
Illustrated 

VOLUME    I 
HISTORY   AND   CRITICISM 


Cambridge  : 

at  the  University   Press 
1912 


Camfcritigc : 

PRINTED   BY  JOHN   CLAY,    M.A. 
AT   THE   UNIVERSITY   PRESS 


TO 
MY   WIFE 


G561S6 


PEEFACE 


HERETOFORE,  even  the  best  histories  of  the  Church 
of  England  have  been  noticeably  lacking  in  adequate 
information  relating  to  our  subject,  while  the  average  history 
written  by  Nonconformists  is  not  unnaturally  apt  to  be  some- 
what partial  in  its  treatment.  English  Church  history  as  a 
whole,  however,  cannot  be  said  to  be  satisfactorily  studied, 
unless  the  story  of  Dissent  is  fully  and  fairly  presented.  In 
the  past,  it  is  true,  English  Church  historians  may  have  felt 
that  the  record  of  organized  separation  from  the  Established 
Church  was  not  of  sufficient  interest  or  importance  to  justify 
any  detailed  presentation.  The  modern  student,  however,  who 
wishes  as  far  as  possible  to  know  all  the  facts  of  English  Church 
history,  cannot  be  satisfied  to  remain  largely  in  ignorance  or 
doubt  as  to  the  salient  points  of  Dissenting  history. 

To  the  student  who  desires,  in  particular,  to  know  more 
of  the  story  of  early  English  Dissent,  it  is  hoped  that  the 
present  work  may  prove  useful.  As  here  presented,  it  is 
intended  to  be  complete  in  itself  for  the  period  treated ;  but 
it  is  also  designed  as  the  first  section  of  a  larger  treatise 
for  which  the  author  has  been  making  investigations  for  a 
number  of  years.  If  completed  as  planned,  the  entire  work 
will  contain,  besides  a  continuation  of  the  historical  and  critical 
information  to  be  found  in  these  two  volumes,  an  extended 
bibliography  of  between  two  and  three  thousand  items,  which 
has  already  been  prepared  as  a  supplement  to  Dr  Henry 
Martyn  Dexter's  "  Collections  toward  a  Bibliography  of  Con- 
gregationalism ",  but  which  will  be  chiefly  concerned  with  the 
literature  of  the  English  Anabaptists  and  Baptists  before 
1745. 


viii  Preface 

On  examination  it  will  readily  be  seen  that  the  present 
publication  is  not  intended  as  an  exhaustive  history  of  English 
Dissent  during  even  the  period  treated,  but  rather  as  an 
introduction  to  the  study  of  that  history  and  its  literature. 
Furthermore  the  author  has  sought  as  much  as  possible  to 
limit  himself  to  the  discussion  of  points  which  have  not  been 
previously  treated,  or  which  appear  to  have  been  handled  with 
insufficient  care.  Accordingly  some  subjects  that  ought  at 
least  to  be  mentioned  in  a  complete  history  will  scarcely  be 
referred  to  here,  because  on  them  more  or  less  adequate  work 
seems  already  to  have  been  done. 

In  the  following  pages  the  author  has  also  endeavoured  to 
follow  the  trend  of  primary  evidence,  irrespective  of  his  own 
preconceptions  or  of  what  has  previously  been  written  by  others 
on  the  subject.  His  ideal  has  been  to  rely  on  secondary 
evidence  as  little  as  possible,  and  to  amplify  and  correct  the 
studies  of  earlier  writers  (including  his  own  previous  writings), 
in  the  belief  that  such  further  critical  investigation  was  abso- 
lutely necessary,  if  the  subject  was  ever  truly  to  be  understood. 
He  therefore  asks  the  reader  to  keep  these  necessary  limitations 
and  this  ideal  in  mind,  and  to  give  him  a  patient  hearing. 

The  author  does  not  doubt  that  mistakes  will  be  found 
in  his  work,  but  he  has  sought  to  make  their  number  as  few  as 
possible,  and  here  and  elsewhere  to  correct  any  errors  of  the 
presence  of  which  he  has  become  aware.  For  any  others  which 
may  be  found,  he  asks  the  reader's  indulgence.  In  one  instance 
the  title  of  a  manuscript  has  been  expanded  without  a  state- 
ment to  that  effect,  viz.,  "The  second  parte  of  a  Register", 
mentioned  on  page  24.  In  a  note  on  page  96  it  is  incorrectly 
asserted  that  the  patronage  of  the  Rectory  of  Achurch  belonged 
to  the  Browne  family  at  the  time  of  Robert  Browne's  pre- 
sentation. On  the  contrary  Lord  Burghley  presented  it  to  him, 
but  the  main  point  made  in  the  note  remains  unaltered.  Again, 
the  death  of  Samuel  Howe,  or  How,  occurred  in  1640,  not  in  1634 
or  1635  as  suggested  on  page  201.  Definite  evidence  concerning 
that  event  is  given  in  section  xxiii  of  volume  li.  Contrary  to 
what  is  said  on  pages  264-65  the  Anabaptists'  "Humble  Suppli- 
cation" to  King  James  I  evidently  was  printed  in  1620.     This 


Preface  ix 

point  is  at  any  rate  asserted  on  the  title-page  of  the  edition 
published  in  1662,  though  not  found  in  the  "Supplication" 
itself  On  page  275  the  name  Isabel  Toppe  should  read  Israel 
Toppe  (see  Vol.  il.,  pp.  248  and  257).  On  page  279  the  author 
of  "The  Personall  Reigne  of  Christ  vpon  Earth",  1642,  has  been 
given  as  John  Archer,  whose  name  appears  in  the  work,  but 
it  seems  that  his  real  name  may  have  been  Henry  Archer. 
Finally,  I  have  recently  discovered  that  Leonard  Busher's  last 
book  to  which  reference  is  also  made  on  page  279  was  written 
in  English  and  published  in  1647,  while  he  was  still  alive. 
It  bore  on  the  title-page  the  words :  "  Priiited  with  priviledge 
of  the  heauenly  kinge  Christ  Jesus  the  Messiah  and  onely 
son  of  the  moste  high  God  Matt:  28.  29.  Gen  14.  18.  20. 
Anno  Domini  Syons  style  1663.  Romes  style  1647."  James 
Toppe's  manuscript  reply,  of  which  the  title  has  been  given 
on  the  same  page  and  the  text  of  which  the  present  author 
hopes  soon  to  publish,  was  accordingly  not  ^vritten  until 
about  1648.  That  treatise  is  fortunately  not  imperfect. 
Busher  appears  to  have  left  Delft  after  printing  his  work,  and 
one  naturally  wonders  if  at  that  favourable  time  he  may  not 
have  returned  to  London,  his  native  home.  It  should  further 
be  stated  here,  that  any  rare  manuscripts  or  books  to  which 
reference  is  made  in  this  work,  but  of  which  the  present  location 
is  for  special  reasons  withheld,  will  all  be  included  in  a  later 
bibliographical  volume,  if  adequate  support  can  be  secured,  and 
there  be  definitely  located. 

Brief  allusion  should  also  have  been  made  in  the  Introduction 
to  the  articles  relating  to  various  early  English  Dissenters  in 
"The  Dictionary  of  National  Biography",  in  Dr  James  Hastings' 
"  Encyclopaidia  of  Religion  and  Ethics  ",  and  in  the  eleventh 
edition  of  "  The  Encyclopaedia  Britannica ".  Some  of  these 
articles  have  features  of  distinct  value,  but  not  a  few  invite 
revision  in  later  editions. 

Since  the  Introduction  went  to  press,  a  copy  of  the  English 
edition  of  Professor  W.  J.  McGlothlin's  "  Baptist  Confessions  of 
Faith"  has  come  into  the  author's  hands.  Though  the  work 
was  only  very  recently  published  at  Philadelphia,  it  has  already 
been  found  advisable  to  enlarge  and  thus  improve  it.     Such  a 

a  5 


X  Preface 

book  has  long  been  needed,  and  this  undoubtedly  contains 
much  useful  information ;  but  in  various  respects  it  is  as  yet 
disappointing,  and  as  a  whole  can  still  hardly  be  said  to  com- 
pare favourably  with  Professor  Williston  Walker's  volume  on 
a  similar  subject,  viz.,  "The  Creeds  and  Platforms  of  Congre- 
gationalism," New  York,  1893. 

Three  other  books  have  lately  been  published  which  require 
mention  in  these  pages.  One  of  them  is  the  Rev.  William 
Pierce's  edition  of  "  The  Marprelate  Tracts  ",  London,  1911,  a 
painstaking  and  thorough  work  in  which,  however,  the  text  has 
been  unfortunately  modernized.  The  second  is  the  first  volume 
of  Mr  Henry  W.  Clark's  "  History  of  English  Nonconformity 
from  Wiclif  to  the  Close  of  the  Nineteenth  Century  ",  London, 
1911.  This  volume  covers  the  period  from  Wiclif  to  the 
Restoration.  In  his  prefatory  Note  (p.  v)  Mr  Clark  says  that 
what  "has  been  here  attempted  is  not  so  much  the  discovery  and 
presentation  of  fresh  facts,  but  rather  the  bringing  of  the 
recorded  happenings  into  the  light  of  one  general  principle  to 
be  estimated  and  judged... the  underlying  idea  is  the  testing  of 
events  as  to  their  success  or  failure  in  manifesting  a  changeless 
spirit  and  ideal."  Consequently,  though  Mr  Clark  has  read 
widely  and  with  some  discrimination,  his  book  does  not  contain 
such  information  as  requires  special  mention  here. 

The  third  work  to  which  reference  should  be  made  is  the 
Rev.  Walter  H.  Burgess's  "  John  Smith  the  Se-Baptist  Thomas 
Helwys  and  the  first  Baptist  Church  in  England  With  fresh 
Light  upon  the  Pilgrim  Fathers'  Church",  London,  1911. 
This  book,  though  a  popular  treatise,  is  of  real  historical  value, 
as  well  as  written  in  a  pleasing  style.  On  account  of  its  late 
appearance  and  its  subject-matter  it  requires  rather  extended 
comment. 

With  some  qualifications  and  corrections  Mr  Burgess's  work 
very  well  supplements  a  portion  of  the  contents  of  the  present 
book,  in  which  it  was  found  unadvisable  to  insert  such  a 
detailed  presentation  of  the  views  and  controversies  of  Smyth, 
Helwys,  and  Murton.  On  pages  212-19  and  239-69  also  the 
early  Anabaptist  Confessions  of  Faith  published  respectively  by 
Helwys'  and  by  Smyth's  followers  are  wisely  given  in  good  part, 


Preface  xi 

thus  making  their  reproduction  in  the  present  treatise  less 
necessary. 

Mr  Burgess's  best  services,  perhaps,  have  been  rendered  on 
what  for  convenience  may  be  called  the  genealogical  side  of  his 
subject.  Here  he  has  achieved  signal  success.  He  gives  a  number 
of  fresh  details  concerning  the  University  life  and  later  career 
in  Lincoln  of  John  Smyth  (pp.  43-52),  and  various  interesting 
points  relating  to  the  ancestry,  station  in  life,  and  education  of 
Thomas  Helwys  of  Broxtowe  Hall  "  overlooking  Basford  "  in 
Nottinghamshire  (pp.  107-17).  Last  but  not  least  he  proves 
that  John  Robinson,  Pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  was  the  son 
of  John  and  Ann  Robinson  of  Sturton  le  Steeple,  Nottingham- 
shire, and  had  a  brother  William  and  a  sister  Mary ;  and  that 
his  wife,  Bridget  White,  was  the  second  daughter  of  Alexander 
and  Eleanor  White  likewise  of  Sturton,  both  of  the  families 
represented  being  those  of  substantial  yeomen  (p.  317). 

Of  the  details  found  in  Mr  Burgess's  book  not  already  or 
elsewhere  mentioned  in  the  present  work,  the  following  are 
perhaps  among  the  most  important :  viz.,  that  a  fifth  copy  of 
John  Smyth's  "  A  Paterne  of  True  Prayer  ",  London,  1605,  has 
recently  been  acquired  by  the  British  Museum  (p.  54);  that 
Smyth  was  "  town  lecturer  "  at  St  Peter  at  Arches,  Lincoln,  and 
is  referred  to  as  "  clericus  conscionator  "  before  the  beginning  of 
his  troubles  there  (p.  62);  that  Geoffrey  Helwys, '"Merchant 
Taylor '  and  alderman  of  the  City  of  London  ",  was  Thomas 
Helwys'  uncle,  not  his  brother  as  suggested  on  page  256  of  the 
present  volume  (p.  289) ;  that  John  Wilkinson  was  deceased  by 
1619  (p.  302) ;  and  that  [John  Murton],  while  a  close  prisoner 
in  Newgate,  "  having  not  the  use  of  pen  and  ink ",  wrote  the 
Anabaptists'  "  Humble  Supj^lication "  of  1620  "  in  milk,  in 
sheets  of  paper  brought  to  him  by  the  woman  his  keeper  from 
a  friend  in  London  as  the  stopples  of  his  milk  bottle  ",  which 
were  later  read  "  by  fire  "  by  this  friend,  transcribed,  and  pre- 
served (pp.  308-9). 

With  the  historical  views  maintained  in  the  introductory 
and  concluding  chapters  of  Mr  Burgess's  book,  and  with  a  good 
many  minor  details  other  than  those  mentioned  above,  the 
present  author  finds  himself  unable  to  agree.     The  opinions 


xii  Preface 

advanced  in  those  chapters  are  in  general  the  traditional  ones 
which  have  long  been  popular  with  writers  of  Dissenting 
history,  and  with  which  any  student  is  already  more  or  less 
familiar,  only  the  influence  of  the  early  English  Anabaptists  is 
here  more  highly  rated  than  has  hitherto  been  customary, — 
and  in  the  present  writer's  opinion  somewhat  exaggerated. 

Naturally  there  are  a  number  of  minor  inaccuracies  in  the 
volume,  such  as  every  researcher  in  this  field  is  likely  to  make 
for  years  to  come.  Some  of  them  need  to  be  noticed  here.  On 
page  157  Mr  Burgess  asserts  his  belief  that  "  I.H.",  the  author 
of  "  A  Description  of  the  Church  of  Christ ",  1610,  was  a 
Familist.  On  the  contrary  there  is  practically  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  he  was  Joseph  Hall,  later  Bishop  of  Norwich,  who 
was  personally  acquainted  both  with  John  Smyth  and  John 
Robinson.  On  page  226,  at  the  suggestion  of  the  Rev. 
Alexander  Gordon,  Mr  Burgess  gives  a  new  reading  for  the 
word  hitherto  usually  read  as  "  Fryelers  "  in  the  title  of  one 
of  Helwys'  publications,  taking  it  without  question  to  be 
"  Fryesers  ",  i.e.,  according  to  his  interpretation,  Frisians.  The 
correct  reading,  however,  is  certainly  "  Fryelers  ",  for  while  an 
imperfect  letter  is  used  for  the  "  1 ",  it  is  not  a  broken  "  s  ", 
as  a  careful  examination  will  plainly  reveal.  Furthermore, 
"Fryelers"  ("  Free-willers  ")  is  just  the  word  required  by  the 
contents  of  the  work,  while  Frisians  is  as  manifestly  out  of 
place,  to  say  nothing  of  the  difficulty  of  finding  the  word 
Frisians  in  this  imaginary  word  "Fryesers".  On  page  318  it 
is  said  that  Henry  Ainsworth's  "  A  Seasonable  Discourse  or  a 
Censure  upon  a  Dialogue  of  the  Anabaptists "  "  remained  in 
manuscript  for  some  years,. . ."  This  was  not  the  case.  The  work 
was  first  printed  in  1623  shortly  after  it  was  written,  and  the 
title  of  this  edition  may  be  seen  on  page  267  of  the  present 
volume.  On  page  322  Mr  Burgess  speaks  of  the  exceptional 
interest  attaching  to  the  Bodleian  copy  of  Edmond  Jessop's  "  A 
Discovery  of  the  Errors  of  the  English  Anabaptists ",  1623, 
"  because  it  has  been  profusely  annotated  with  marginal  notes 
in  a  contemporary  hand  ",  and  supported  by  the  purport  of 
some  of  these  annotations  ventures  to  express  the  view  (p.  327) 
that  "  in  or  about  the  year  1625  "  "  attention  was  being  paid 


Preface  xiii 

[by  the  English  Anabaptists]  to  the  more  limited  meaning  of 
the  word  '  baptize  '  in  the  sense  of  *  dip '."  The  present  writer 
has  consulted  this  copy  of  Jessop's  work,  and  does  not  hesitate 
to  say  that  practically  all  of  the  annotations  therein  contained 
were  written  after  1640.  The  dating  has  largely  to  be  deter- 
mined by  the  style  of  writing  employed  and  by  the  use  of  one 
or  two  exceptional  words  which  evidently  began  to  be  used 
about  1650  or  just  after.  It  may  be  well  to  call  attention  also 
to  the  fact  that  Mr  Burgess  has  unfortunately  incorporated  in 
his  book  some  of  the  blunders  which  occur  in  Dr  B.  Evans' 
"  Early  English  Baptists  ".  For  instance,  on  page  333  mention 
is  made  of  Cornelius  Aresto  (Cornelis  Claesz.  Anslo),  on  page 

334  of  Thos.  Denys  ("  thomas  elwijs  "  [Helwys]),  and  on  page 

335  of  James  Joppe  (James  Toppe).  Further,  a  mistake  has 
clearly  been  made  in  associating  this  last  name  with  that  of  a 
"  certain  John  Joope"  who  "  was  a  member  of  Henoch  Clapham's 
Separatist  Church... at  Amsterdam  in  1598"  (p.  335  note  1). 
But  these  are  comparatively  small  blemishes  in  an  otherwise 
excellent  book,  which  will  be  welcomed  by  students  as  well 
as  by  the  general  reader. 

Two  further  notable  discoveries  relating  to  the  early  English 
Dissenters  have  recently  been  made.  For  information  regarding 
them  the  author  is  indebted  to  the  courtesy  of  the  Rev.  F.  Ives 
Cater  of  Oundle,  to  whom  belongs  the  credit  of  having  done 
more  than  any  other  person  to  elucidate  the  later  years  of 
Robert  Browne's  life.  These  most  recent  discoveries  have  been 
made  by  the  Rev.  R.  M.  Serjeantson,  M.A.,  F.S.A.^  who,  it 
seems,  following  suggestions  made  by  Mr  Cater  has  succeeded 
in  finding  records  relating  to  Browne's  excommunication  by 
William  Piers,  Bishop  of  Peterborough,  about  December,  1631, 
and  also  a  nuncupative  will  of  Browne's  which  was  exhibited 
and  proved  in  April,  1634,  and  in  which  he  speaks  of  "my 
deare  and  loveinge  wiefe  Elizabeth  Browne,  who  hath  ever  bine 
a  most  faithfull  and  a  good  wiefe  unto  me ", — an  entirely 
unexpected  and  welcome  statement.  Thus  we  have  at  last 
definite  evidence  of  the  fact  and  time  of  Browne's  excommuni- 
cation, and  of  his  ultimate  reconciliation  with  his  wife. 
1  In  "A  History  of  the  Church  of  St  Giles,  Northampton",  1912,  pp.  198-202. 


xiv  Preface 

In  the  course  of  his  studies  the  author  has  been  greatly 
indebted  to  many  for  courtesies  shown  him.  In  some  instances 
he  has  had  exceptional  opportunities  for  examining  unique 
treasures  at  first  hand ;  and  he  now  extends  his  hearty  thanks 
to  all  those  who  have  thus  aided  him.  Among  others  he 
would  specially  mention  Principal  George  P.  Gould,  M.A.,  of 
Regent's  Park  College,  London ;  Henry  Guppy,  M.A.,  Librarian 
of  the  John  Rylands  Library,  Manchester;  Principal  Sidney 
W.  Bowser,  B.A.,  of  the  Midland  Baptist  College,  Nottingham ; 
Canon  John  Watson,  Librarian  of  York  Minster  Library ; 
Professor  Dr  S.  Cramer  of  the  Mennonite  Archives,  and  the 
assistants  in  the  University  Library,  Amsterdam ;  Francis 
J.  H.  Jenkinson,  M.A.,  Librarian  of  the  University  Library, 
Cambridge;  Falconer  Madan,  M.A.,  Sub-Librarian  of  the 
Bodleian  Library,  Oxford;  S.  Wayland  Kershaw,  M.A.,  late 
Librarian,  and  Rev.  Claude  Jenkins,  M.A.,  present  Librarian, 
of  Lambeth  Palace  Library;  John  A.  Herbert,  B.A.,  formerly 
Superintendent  of  the  Manuscript  Reading  Room  in  the 
British  Museum ;  Dr  G.  K.  Fortescue,  Keeper  of  the  Printed 
Books  in  the  British  Museum ;  and  Sir  Edward  Maunde 
Thompson,  K.C.B.,  etc.,  late  Director  and  Principal  Librarian 
of  the  British  Museum. 

Recently,  through  the  kindness  of  Messrs  Sotheby,  Wilkin- 
son and  Hodge,  the  author  has  enjoyed  the  very  exceptional 
privilege  of  viewing  and  transcribing  four  printed  leaves  which 
up  to  that  time  probably  no  modern  student  had  seen,  containing 
the  lost  "Ten  Counter  Demands"  of  Thomas  Drakes,  concerning 
which  Dr  Edward  Arber  has  said  ("  The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim 
Fathers",  p.  242)  that  it  "is  apparently  totally  lost".  The 
discovery  of  this  tract  not  only  modifies  Dr  Arber's  statement, 
but  also  corrects  an  opinion  expressed  on  pp.  191-2  of  the 
present  work.  The  entire  text  of  this  long-lost  writing  is  now 
given,  probably  for  the  first  time  since  its  original  publication 
about  1618  or  1619,  in  the  volume  of  documents. 

Excluding  minor  improvements,  omissions,  and  additions 
(some  of  which  have  been  made  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  the 
book  up  to  date),  the  material  here  presented  was  offered  under 
another  title,  in  the  autumn  of  1908,  as   a   dissertation   for 


Preface  xv 

the  B.Litt.  degree  at  Oxford  University.  To  the  examiners 
appointed  to  report  thereon,  namely,  Professor  C.  H.  Firth  and 
Dr  Frederick  J,  Powicke,  the  author  desires  to  acknowledge  his 
indebtedness  for  various  helpful  criticisms  and  suggestions.  To 
the  former  of  these  he  owes  thanks  also  for  encouragement  given 
by  him  as  the  author's  supervisor  for  the  B.Litt.  course,  as  well 
as  for  commending  his  work  to  the  Cambridge  University  Press. 
Finally,  he  Avishes  to  express  to  the  Secretary  and  Syndics  of 
the  Cambridge  University  Press  his  grateful  appreciation  of 
their  willingness  to  undertake  the  production  of  the  book,  and 
of  the  attractive  form  they  have  given  it;  while  for  generous 
assistance  in  bringing  about  an  early  publication,  he  has  to 
make  further  special  acknowledgement  to  various  persons,  and 
in  particular  to  his  friends  Dr  J.  Vernon  Bartlet  and  Henry 
Guppy,  M.A.,  and  to  Sir  G.  W.  Macalpine. 


C.  B. 


Oxford, 

16  December  1911. 


CONTENTS 

VOLUME  I 

INTKODUCTION 

PAGE 

1.  An  Account  of  the  printed  Literature  on  the  Subject  (chiefly 

modern  and  general)  with  Criticisms 1 

2.  Collections  of  printed  Books  and  Manuscripts  that  should  be 

visited  in  the  study  of  early  English  dissenting  history  (with 
notes  upon  the  strong  points  of  each  library)  ...        22 

3.  Notes  relating  to  the  Contents  of  the  following  pages         .        .        26 

FOREWOKD  37 

CHAPTER  I 
The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612  .  ....        41 

CHAPTER  II 

The  gradual  Growth  of  Puritanism  and  its  Contribution  to  the 

Development  of  English  Separatism  until  1581   ...        68 

CHAPTER  III 

Robert  Browne  and  the  Organization  of  the  first  English  Congre- 
gational Church 94 

CHAPTER  IV 
The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists 118 

CHAPTER  V 
The  Barrowists  under  the  Leadership  of  Francis  Johnson  until  1597      136 

CHAPTER  VI 
The  Barrowists  on  the  Continent 155 


xviii  Contents 

CHAPTER  VII 

PAGE 

Certain  obscure  Barrowist  and  Separatist  Congregations  between 

1688  and  1641 183 

CHAPTER  VIII 
The  Family  of  Love  and  the  English  Seekers 209 

CHAPTER  IX 

The  first  two  English  Anabaptist  Congregations  and  their  Leaders        221 

CHAPTER  X 

The  Congregation  of  English  Anabaptists  under  the  Leadership  of 

Thomas  Helwys  and  John  Murton 251 

CHAPTER  XI 

The  English  General,  or  Arminian,  Anabaptists  between  1624  and 

1642 270 

CHAPTER  XII 
The  Rise  of  the  Independents 281 

CHAPTER  XIII 

The  History  of  Henry  Jacob's  Independent  Puritan  Congregation 
in  London ;  and  the  Story  of  the  Rise  of  the  English  Par- 
ticular, or  Calvinistic,  Anabaptists 312 

Appendix.    A  Critical  Examination  of  the  Gould  Manuscript         .      336 

CHAPTER  XIV 
The  Churches  of  New  England  until  about  1641       .        .        .        .357 

APPENDIX  A 

An    additional    Note    concerning    the    book    entitled,    "Truth's 

Champion" 369 

APPENDIX  B 

An  additional  Note  relating  to  "A  very  plain  and  well  grounded 

Treatise  concerning  Baptisme" 370 


Contents  xix 

APPENDIX   C 

PAGE 

The  latest  Discovery  relating  to  John  Wilkinson      ....      370 

APPENDIX   D 

The  Will  of  Ann  Robinson,  Mother  of  John  Robinson,  Pastor  of  the 

Pilgrim  Fathers 376 

APPENDIX  E 

Did  any  English  General  Anabaptist  practise  Immersion  before 

1641? ....      378 


LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS 


(chronologically  arranged) 

Title-page  of  John  Veron's  "An  Holsome  Antidotus" 

[1548] Frontispiece 

Separatist  Covenant  of  Richard  Fitz's  Piivy  Church 

[1567-71 1] To  face  page  90 

First  page  of  Robert  Browne's  "  A  Trve  and  Short  De- 
claration" [15831]         „  180 

First  page  of  a  Brownist  Petition  in  MS.  "touching 

Mercie  &  vnitie"  [1593?] „  270 

Title-page  of  George  Johnson's  "A  discourse  of  some 

troubles",  1603 „  360 


INTRODUCTION 

I.    An  account  of  the  printed  literature  on  the  subject 
(chiefly  modern  and  general)  with  criticisms 

It  would  be  unnecessary  and  unduly  tedious  to  give  here 
all  the  modern  general  works  that  refer  to  this  subject  or  to 
parts  of  it.  Those  who  wish  to  become  acquainted  with  an 
approximately  complete  list  of  such  books  or  pamphlets  published 
in  England  and  America  may  consult  Dr  Henry  Martyn  Dexter's 
bibliography  at  the  end  of  his  Congregationalism  of  the  last 
three  hundred  years  as  seen  in  its  Literature,  and  the  Rev. 
T.  G.  Crippen's  Bibliography  of  Congregational  Church  History^. 
What  is  needed  at  present  is  not  a  mere  bibliographical  list, 
but  a  selected  bibliography,  with  such  criticism  of  each  work 
as  may  serve  to  facilitate  the  researches  of  future  students  by 
showing  what  books  are  really  worth  consulting,  and  what  are 
not. 

Now  some  of  the  works  to  which  reference  is  here  made 
are,  for  our  present  purpose,  of  only  slight  importance.  Such 
are  for  the  most  part  mentioned  by  title  only.  They  were 
generally  produced  in  an  uncritical  period,  or  by  writers  none 
too  exact,  who  contented  themselves  with  rewriting  what  others 
had  done  before  them,  and  with  making  but  slight  additions, 
which  sometimes  had  better  have  been  omitted.  Other  works 
are  of  such  a  popular  nature  as  to  contain  little  of  special  value 
for  a  critical  study  of  the  subject.  General  English  Church 
histories  have  not  been  included  in  the  list  here  given. 

'  Transactions  of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society,  for  May  1905 
(Vol.  II.,  No.  2),  and  May  1906  (Vol.  ii.,  No.  5). 

B.  1 


2  Early  English  Disse^iters 

Two  or  three  works  concerning  a  portion  of  this  field  of 
investigation  were  written  at  an  early  date.  Such  were  Gov. 
William  Bradford's  History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  and 
Nathaniel  Morton's  New  Englands  Memoriall,  Cambridge 
[N.E.],  1669.  In  1681  Bishop  Stillingfleet  published  a  small 
quarto  volume  entitled,  "  The  Unreasonableness  of  Separation : 
or,  An  Impartiall  Account  of  the  History,  Nature,  and  Pleas 
of  the  Present  Separation  from  the  Communion  of  the  Church 
of  England",  etc.  This  was  at  least  twice  reprinted  and  is 
a  suggestive  book. 

It  was  not  until  1700,  however,  that  any  general  work  of 
importance  appears  to  have  been  published  in  defence  of  the 
Puritans  or  of  any  branch  of  separatists  with  whom  we  are  at 
present  concerned.  In  1702  Cotton  Mather  brought  out  his 
now  celebrated  folio  entitled,  " Magnalia  Christi  Americana: 
or  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  New  England,  from  Its  First 
Planting  in  the  year  1620  ",  a  book  of  decided  historical  value. 
Nevertheless,  it  contains  a  surprising  inaccuracy  relative  to  the 
text  of  the  first  covenant  of  the  church  at  Salem  drawn  up  in 
1629,  which  is  important  enough  to  suggest  that  some  critical 
care  should  be  employed  in  reading  the  work.  In  1710  James 
Peirce  brought  out  his  Vindicice  Fratrum  Dissentientium  in 
Anglia,  etc.,  which  was  translated  and  republished  in  1717, 
and  again  in  1718,  under  the  title,  A  Vindication  of  the 
Dissenters,  in  Answer  to  Dr  William  Nichols's  Defence  of  the 
Doctrine  and  Discipline  of  the  Church  of  England. 

From  1698  to  1733  John  Strype  was  publishing  his 
numerous  and  voluminous  writings  concerning  the  Church 
of  England  and  its  dignitaries  after,  and  during,  the  time 
of  the  Reformation.  These  works,  of  course,  contain  some 
references  to  the  early  English  separatists,  but  while  Strype 
was  a  more  careful  scholar  than  many  of  his  day,  it  is  well 
always  to  see  the  original  documents  from  which  he  secured 
his  information,  for  sometimes  he  gives  abstracts  instead  of  the 
actual  texts  of  documents,  and  occasionally  he  makes  statements 
without  sufficient  warrant.  The  dates  he  assigns  to  undated 
documents  also  should  always  be  critically  examined.  During 
the  years  1732-8  the  Rev.  Daniel  Neal,  M.A.,  published  four 


Introduction  3 

octavo  volumes  entitled,  The  History  of  the  Puritans  or  Pro- 
testant Nonconformists,  etc.,  a  work  that  has  been  republished 
several  times.  Though  a  very  good  production  for  that  early 
period,  and  still  of  some  value,  it  now  needs  a  thorough  rewriting. 
In  fact,  in  my  opinion,  a  far  better  result  would  be  produced, 
if  the  whole  subject  should  be  independently  studied  from  the 
source  literature  and  the  modern  critical  standpoint. 

Up  to  this  time  (1738)  the  Independents  in  England  and 
the  Baptists  had  published  nothing  in  the  way  of  a  history 
of  their  rise  and  growth.  Some  of  the  early  leaders  of  the 
Particular  (Calvinistic)  Baptists  in  London,  however,  had 
fortunately  left  behind  them  a  few  documents  relating  to  their 
early  history,  and  containing  a  suggestion  of  facts  of  which 
even  at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Baptist 
leaders  themselves  were  not  aware.  These  papers  evidently 
had  first  been  in  the  possession  of  Henry  Jessey  and  William 
KiflSn  and  were  probably  transferred  by  Kiffin  into  the  keeping 
of  Mr  Richard  Adams,  his  successor  in  the  church  at  Devonshire 
Square,  who  in  turn  placed  them  in  the  hands  of  Benjamin 
Stinton,  son-in-law  of  Benjamin  Keach  and  Keach's  successor 
as  pastor  of  the  congi-egation  in  Horsley-Down.  Adams 
perhaps  suggested  to  Stinton  the  desirability  of  gathering 
further  materials  for  compiling  a  history  of  the  English  Baptists. 
Whether  this  be  true  or  not,  Stinton  soon  began  the  task  of 
neatly  copying  his  manuscript  collections  into  small  volumes, 
probably  all  of  quarto  size.  His  first  compilation  of  important 
documents  was  begun  "in  Ian:  1710-11",  and  until  his  death 
he  seems  to  have  been  occupied  in  the  work  of  transcription 
and  in  the  arrangement  of  the  material  he  had  collected.  He 
died,  however,  while  still  a  comparatively  young  man  on  Feb.  11, 
1718,  and  it  is  supposed  that  not  long  after  some  of  Stin ton's 
manuscripts  came  into  the  hands  of  Thomas  Crosby,  who  was 
not  a  church  historian,  but,  as  he  in  one  place  styles  himself 
"  Teacher  of  the  Mathematicks  upon  Horselydown  in  Southwark". 

For  some  time,  as  Crosby  tells  us,  he  cherished  the  hope 
that  he  might  find  some  one  more  capable  than  himself  to 
complete  Stinton's  work,  but  in  the  meanwhile,  he  employed 
his  leisure  hours  in  arranging  the  historical  material  at  his 

1—2 


4  Early  English  Dissenters 

disposal,  and  in  supplying  as  far  as  possible  any  portions  of  the 
history  left  unfinished  by  Stinton.  Finally,  though  with  some 
misgivings,  at  the  request  of  two  Baptist  ministers,  Mr  Edward 
Wallin  and  Mr  William  Arnold,  who  died  respectively  in  1733 
and  1734,  Crosby  gave  his  historical  materials  into  the  hands 
of  the  Rev.  Daniel  Neal,  M.A.,  "who  had  undertaken",  he  says, 
"  to  write  an  History  of  the  Puritans ;  under  which  general 
name,  I  did  apprehend  the  English  Baptists  might  very  well 
be  included:  And  he  had  them  [Stinton  and  Crosby's  historical 
collections]  in  his  hands  some  years ".  What  then  was  the 
natural  disappointment  of  the  Baptists  and  especially  of 
Thomas  Crosby,  when,  after  the  lapse  of  several  years  the 
whole  history  of  their  "  rise  and  progress  "  was  found  to  have 
been  distilled  into  "  less  than  five  pages  of  his  [Mr  Neal's] 
third  volume :  and  that  too  with  very  great  partiality  "  !  This 
all  too  apparent  slight  may  have  caused  Crosby  to  demand  the 
speedy  return  of  his  manuscripts,  and  to  commence  at  once 
the  preparation  for  the  press  of  a  history  of  the  English  Baptists 
that  would  not  only  make  a  better  impression  on  the  unbiassed 
reader,  but  would  at  the  same  time  correct  the  misstatements 
of  the  Rev.  Daniel  Neal.  At  any  rate,  it  is  to  be  noticed  that 
Neal's  fourth  volume  and  Crosby's  first  bear  the  same  date, 
1738.  Now,  when  Crosby  began  the  printing  of  his  work 
(which,  he  says,  was  made  up  chiefly  from  Stinton's  manuscripts), 
he  expected  to  publish  only  two  volumes,  but  before  the 
appearance  of  the  second  in  1739,  he  tells  us,  he  had  received 
so  much  important  additional  material  (partly,  or  almost  entirely, 
composed  of  collections  made  by  Stinton,  which  evidently  had 
for  some  reason  not  been  in  Crosby's  possession  before),  that  he 
felt  obliged  to  publish  it,  in  order  that  in  the  future  he  himself 
might  not  incur  the  censure  of  being  "  a  partial  historian ". 
Accordingly  third  and  fourth  volumes  appeared  in  1740.  The 
work  bears  the  title,  THE  \  HISTORY  \  OF  THE  \  English 
Baptists,  I  FROM  \  The  Reformation  to  the  Beginning  \  of 
the  Reign  of  King  George  I,  London,  8°. 

Crosby  had  scarcely  brought  out  his  first  volume,  when  the 
Rev.  John  Lewis,  a  clergyman  of  Margate,  published  his  more 
scholarly  and  scientific  "  Brief  History  of  the  Rise  and  Progress 


Introductimi  5 

of  Anabaptism  in  England.  To  which  is  prefixed,  Some  Account 
of  the  Learned  Dr.  Wiclif,  and  A  Defence  of  Him  from  the  false 
Charge  of  Ids,  and  his  Followers,  denying  Infent  Baptism",  1738. 
Naturally  Lewis's  account  differed  radically  from  Crosby's,  and 
furthermore,  Lewis  ignored  Crosby's  authority  as  an  historian, 
and  easily  showed  himself  to  be  more  than  a  match  for  Crosby. 
Nevertheless,  though  Lewis  had,  at  the  time  of  the  publication 
of  his  pamphlet,  been  collecting  materials  concerning  the  English 
Anabaptists  for  nearly  forty  years,  he  had  not  at  his  disposal 
certain  important  documents  with  which  the  Baptists  alone 
could  have  supplied  him.  Crosby  of  course  replied  to  Lewis, 
and  issued  a  scarce  octavo  pamphlet,  entitled,  "  A  BRIEF  | 
REPLY  I  TO  THE  |  Reverend  Mr.  John  Lewis's  \  Brief 
HISTORY  of  the  Rise  |  and  Progress  of  Anabaptism  j 
in  England;  \  And  to  his  |  Account  of  Dr.  Wickliffe,  |  ...", 
London,  1738,  8°,  pp.  44. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  Crosby's  History  is  in  many 
respects  imperfect.  Even  Lewis  knows  the  sources  better 
than  he.  Further,  Crosby's  arrangement  of  the  material  is 
especially  poor,  the  views  expressed  have  not  always  been 
thoroughly  thought  out,  and  they  are  at  least  in  one  or  two 
important  instances  very  incorrect.  Crosby's  spirit,  however, 
is  excellent,  and  for  nearly  two  hundred  years  his  four  volumes 
have  been  regarded  with  favour,  and  in  certain  quarters  as 
almost  inspired.  Next  after  William  Sewel's  History  of  the 
Rise,  Increase  and  Progress  of  the... Quakers,  published  in 
Dutch  in  1717,  and  in  English  in  1722,  Crosby's  work  is 
probably  the  earliest  important  apologetic  histoiy  of  any  body 
of  English  separatists. 

So  successful  in  fact  was  Crosby  that  in  1770  Morgan 
Edwards  brought  out  at  Philadelphia  a  small  volume  entitled, 
Materials  towards  a  History  of  the  Baptists  in  Pennsylvania, 
both  British  and  German,  etc.,  and  in  1792  a  second  called 
Materials  towards  a  History  of  the  Baptists  in  [New]  Jersey. 
About  1790  appeared  a  small  publication  by  John  Asplund, 
entitled,  The  Annual  Register  of  the  Baptist  Denomination,  in 
North- America,  and  during  the  years  1793-1802  Dr  John 
Rippon  edited  four  volumes  of  a  work  bearing  a  similar  title, 


6  Early  Eiiglish  Dissenters 

The  Baptist  Annual  Register  (by  Dr  Dexter  wrongly  ascribed 
to  Asplund).  In  this  work  of  Rippon's  was  first  published 
Joshua  Thomas's  History  of  the  Baptist  Association  in  Wales 
from  the  year  1650,  to  the  year  1790.  Later  (in  1795) 
Thomas's  contribution  was  republished  in  pamphlet  form. 

These  works  that  have  just  been  mentioned  contain  nothing 
of  special  value  concerning  the  period  under  investigation,  but 
simply  show  how  the  historical  spirit  was  spreading  among  the 
Baptists  of  America,  as  well  as  of  England,  before  1800.  There 
is  one  important  work,  however,  that  must  be  mentioned  here. 
This  is  Isaac  Backus's  A  History  of  New- England,  With 
partimdar  Reference  to  the  Denomination  of  Christians  called 
BAPTISTS.  The  first  volume  appeared  in  1777,  the  second 
in  1784,  and  the  third  in  1796.  In  general,  Backus  accepted 
Crosby's  point  of  view,  but  he  has  the  advantage  of  Crosby,  in 
that  having  gathered  his  data  himself  he  was  better  prepared 
to  publish  a  consecutive  and  more  accurate  narrative.  Backus 
is  further  said  to  have  brought  out  An  Abridgement  of  the 
Church  History  of  New  England,  in  1804.  His  larger  works 
have  all  been  republished. 

Thus  like  the  Friends,  or  Quakers,  Baptists  early  began  to 
manifest  an  interest  in  the  history  of  their  origin, — an  interest 
which  with  the  recent  organization  of  Baptist  Historical  Societies 
in  England  and  in  America  is  being  renewed  to-day.  Following 
the  works  written  in  America  there  appeared  in  England  in 
1811  the  first  volume  of  Joseph  Ivimey's  History  of  the  English 
Baptists,  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  volumes  being  published 
respectively  in  1814,  1823,  and  1830.  This  publication  covers 
a  period  nearly  one  hundred  years  longer  than  that  attempted 
by  Crosby ;  but  while  Ivimey  adds  a  good  many  points  in  the 
early  portion  of  the  history,  he  is  not  always  so  accurate  as  could 
be  desired,  and  both  he  and  Crosby  are  undoubtedly  responsible 
for  the  prevalence  of  more  than  one  error  in  the  historical  views 
of  Baptists  of  to-day.  Ivimey  apparently  was  always  a  more 
genial,  than  critical,  historian,  but  his  last  two  volumes  are  of 
more  importance  than  the  first  two. 

Other  historical  works  by  Baptists,  or  concerning  them, 
were    published    about    this    time.      In    1811   a   treatise   by 


Introduction  7 

H.  Clarke  is  said  to  have  appeared  entitled,  A  History  of  the 
Sahhatariaiis,  or  Seventh-Day  Baptists  in  America,  and  in  1813 
a  work  in  two  volumes  by  D.  Benedict  was  issued,  entitled, 
A  General  History  of  the  Baptist  Denomination  in  America, 
and  other  parts  of  the  World.  In  1 848  the  latter  was  enlarged 
and  republished  in  one  volume  of  nearly  a  thousand  pages. 
Adam  Taylor  also  brought  out  his  important  History  of  the 
English  General  Baptists,  in  tiuo  Parts,  in  1818.  This  work 
is  now  very  scarce.  Mr  Taylor  seems  to  have  had  somewhat 
greater  historical  ability  than  Stinton,  Crosby,  or  Ivimey,  but 
nevertheless  he  was  unable  to  unfetter  himself  entirely  from 
the  trammels  of  the  prevailing  traditional  views  first  expressed 
by  Stinton  and  Crosby. 

Just  before  and  during  a  part  of  the  period  in  which  Ivimey 
was  preparing  his  History,  namely  between  the  years  1808-14, 
was  published  Walter  Wilson's  work  in  four  volumes,  entitled, 
The  History  and  A  ntiquities  of  Dissenting  Churches  and  Meeting 
Houses  in  London,  Westminster,  and  Southwark,  etc.  Wilson's 
extended  MSS.,  probably  containing  much  more  material  than 
was  printed  in  the  four  above-mentioned  volumes,  are  to  be 
found  in  Dr  Williams's  Library,  London. 

In  the  "Collections  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society, 
For  the  Year  1794",  Vol.  in.,  published  at  Boston  [Mass.],  1810, 
pp.  27-76,  appears  an  edition  of  the  remains  of  Governour 
Bradford's  Letter  Book.  This  is  well  worth  the  careful  perusal 
of  the  student.  In  1813,  Benjamin  Brook  published  his 
Lives  of  the  Puritans.  This  work  is  in  three  volumes  and 
is  full  of  valuable  information.  Brook's  MSS.  rewritten  by 
himself  for  a  second  edition  are  in  the  Congregational  Library, 
London. 

The  year  1820  was  the  two  hundredth  anniversary  of  the 
landing  of  the  Pilgrims,  and  various  addresses,  then  delivered 
on  that  subject,  were  issued  in  pamphlet  form.  These,  however, 
with  other  works  relating  to  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  printed  before 
1850,  are  chiefly  of  a  popular  nature  and  do  not  require  extended 
mention  here.  With  their  publication  seems  to  have  begun 
the  present  wide-spread  interest  among  Congregationalists  in 
the  history  of  their  denomination,  and  from    that   time    the 


8  Early  English  Dissenters 

literature  relating  to  Congregational  Church  History  has  greatly 
increased. 

During  the  years  1839-44  the  first  elaborate  collection 
of  material  concerning  the  history  and  literature  of  the 
Congregationalists  was  published  in  three  octavo  volumes. 
The  writer  was  Benjamin  Hanbury,  and  the  work  entitled, 
Historical  Memorials  Relating  to  the  Independents,  or  Congre- 
gationalists: From  their  Rise  to  the  Restoration  of  the  Monarxhy, 
etc.  This  was  a  really  learned  book,  and  contained  for  the  first 
time  much  material  hitherto  hidden  away  in  old  libraries. 
It  is  true  Hanbury 's  style  is  not  very  pleasing,  and  some  of 
his  citations  add  little  interest  to  the  work,  except  in  so  far 
as  they  give  the  reader  an  idea  of  the  tedious  arguments 
employed  in  the  early  separatist  controversial  literature,  but 
in  spite  of  these  faults  Hanbury's  three  volumes  are  of  a  much 
higher  order  than  the  publications  of  Neal,  Crosby,  Backus, 
Ivimey,  and  other  predecessors.  Nevertheless,  even  Hanbury, 
the  indefatigable,  as  he  has  been  styled,  left  many  interesting 
problems  unsolved. 

In  1841  Alexander  Young  brought  out  his  Chronicles  of 
the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  the  Colony  of  Plymouth,  from  ]  602  to 
1625,  and  in  1846  his  Chronicles  of  the  First  Planters  of  the 
Colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay  from  1623  to  1636.  The  former 
of  these  contains  Gov.  William  Bradford's  work,  otherwise 
practically  unknown,  entitled,  A  Dialogue,  or  the  Sum  of  a 
Conference  hetiueen  some  young  men  horn  in  New  England  and 
sundry  ancient  men  that  came  out  of  Holland  and  Old  England, 
anno  domini  1648.  In  1841,  also,  George  Punchard  published 
his  History  of  Congregationalism,  from  about  A.D.  250  to  1616, 
A  second  edition  appeared  during  the  years  1865-81  rewritten 
and  so  much  enlarged  as  to  comprise  five  volumes.  The  first 
two  volumes  of  the  second  edition  contain  little  of  real  value 
and  are  popular  in  style.  Punchard  was  no  critic,  and  he, 
like  some  other  writers,  seems  to  have  felt  obliged  to  use  a 
disproportionate  amount  of  space  in  attempting  to  trace  the 
origin  of  his  denomination  back  to  early  Christian  times. 

Perhaps  the  first  German  contribution  to  Congregational 
history  was  made  by  H.  F.  Uhden  in  1842,  when  he  published 


Introduction  9 

at  Leipzig  a  small  octavo  volume  entitled,  Geschichte  der 
Congregatiunalisten  in  NeutEngland  his  zu  den  Erweckungen 
um  das  Jahr  1740....  A  second  edition  of  this  work  was 
translated  by  H.  C.  Conant  and  published  at  Boston  in  1859 
under  the  title,  The  New  England  Theocracy.  A  History  of 
the  Congregationalists  of  New  England,  etc.  In  1845  Parsons 
Cook  brought  out  a  volume  entitled  A  History  of  German 
Anabaptism,.  ..and  enbracing  a  view. .  .of  the  historical  connection 
between  the  present  Baptists  and  the  Anabaptists. 

About  this  time  considerable  interest  was  manifested  in 
England  in  the  history  and  literature  of  the  English  Reforma- 
tion, and  during  the  years  1846-54  the  English  Baptists 
through  the  agency  of  the  Hanserd  Knollys  Society  published 
ten  volumes  chiefly  composed  of  reprints  of  early  Baptist  works 
with  introductions.  The  two  volumes  of  old  church  records  are 
perhaps  the  most  valuable  to  the  historian,  but  most  of  the 
reprints,  also,  in  spite  of  their  modernized  text,  are  useful. 
Some  of  the  introductions  are  rather  prolix  and  display  too 
little  critical  insight.  It  is  of  course  extremely  doubtful 
whether  a  better  choice  of  early  Baptist  works  for  reprinting 
might  not  have  been  made. 

In  1846-7  were  issued  at  Boston  six  volumes  of  the  Lives 
of  the  Chief  Fathers  of  New  England,  and  in  1847  appeared 
Joseph  Fletcher's  four  small  duodecimo  volumes  entitled.  The 
History  of  the  Revival  and  Progress  of  Independency  in  England 
since  the  Penod  of  the  Reformation.  Mr  Fletcher  seems  to 
have  done  a  good  deal  of  reading,  but  unfortunately  not  in  the 
earliest  source  literature,  so  that  while  his  book  is  in  places 
suggestive  and  well  worth  an  examination,  it  perpetuates 
numerous  errors  of  earlier  writers  and  adds  little  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  subject. 

In  1849  appeared  J.  Hunter's  pamphlet,  entitled  Collections 
concerning  the  Early  History  of  the  founders  of  New  Plymouth, 
an  important  little  work  in  that  it  gave  for  the  first  time  the 
name  of  the  place  where  the  Pilgrim  church  was  organized. 
Hunter's  pamphlet  proved  of  such  interest  that  it  was  rewritten 
and  enlarged  into  a  small  volume  of  over  two  hundred  pages, 
bearing   the   slightly   altered   title,    Collections   concerning  the 


10  Early  English  Dissenters 

Church  or  Congregation  of  Protestant  Separatists,  formed  at 
Scroohy  in  North  Nottinghamshire,  in  the  time  of  King  James  I, 
1854.  The  book  is  suggestive,  and  from  the  time  of  its 
publication  interest  in  Congregational  history  has  still  further 
increased. 

In  1850  Mr  J.  B.  Marsden  first  brought  out  his  work,  twice 
reprinted,  on  The  History  of  the  Early  Puritans :  from  the 
Reformation  to  the  opening  of  the  Civil  War  in  1 642,  London ; 
and  in  1852,  The  History  of  the  Later  Puritans:  from  the  opening 
of  the  Civil  War  in  1642,  to  the  ejection  of  the  N on- conforming 
Clergy  in  1662,  London.  About  this  time  many  small  works 
especially  pertaining  to  the  Pilgrims  and  to  the  early  Puritan 
churches  in  New  England  began  to  appear.  In  1850,  also, 
a  pamphlet  of  twenty-eight  pages  is  said  to  have  been  issued 
by  S.  Adlam,  entitled,  The  First  Church  in  Providence  not  the 
oldest  of  the  Baptists  in  America,  attempted  to  be  shown.  This 
may  have  started  the  controversy  as  to  whether  the  church 
in  Newport,  or  that  in  Providence,  is  the  oldest  Baptist  church 
in  America. 

During  this  period  one  work  followed  closely  upon  another, 
so  that  only  the  most  important  can  be  mentioned.  In  1851, 
R.  Ashton  published  The  Works  of  John  Robinson,  Pastor  of 
the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  With  a  Memoir  and  Annotations,  in  three 
volumes.  Though  the  text  is  unfortunately  modernized,  the 
book  is  of  much  value.  Mr  Ashton  was  apparently  the  first 
scholar  to  notice  that  among  the  early  English  Brownists  and 
Anabaptists  in  Holland  the  question  of  the  proper  mode  of 
baptism  was  never  discussed.  In  1853  appeared  W.  H.  Bartlett's 
The  Pilgrim  Fathers,  or  the  Founders  of  New  England,  etc. 
This  was  reprinted  in  1854.  In  1855  J.  B.  Felt  brought  out 
one  volume  of  The  Ecclesiastical  History  of  New  England,  etc. ; 
in  1855-61  the  Records  of  the  Colony  of  New  Plymouth  in 
New  England  were  edited  by  N.  B.  Shurtleff  and  D.  Pulsifer  in 
twelve  quarto  volumes.  In  1856  the  Massachusetts  Historical 
Society  issued  a  separate  edition  of  Governor  William  Bradford's 
History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  which  had  been  previously 
printed  in  the  Collections  of  the  Society.  A  great  improve- 
ment over  this  edition  was  secured  in  1896  by  the  appearance 


Introduction  11 

of  the  splendid  edition  of  the  History  of  the  Plimouth  Plantation 
Containing  an  Account  of  the  Voyage  of  the  'Mayflower'  Written 
by  William  Bradford  One  of  the  Founders  and  second  Governor 
of  the  Colony  Now  Reproduced  in  Facsimile  from  the  Original 
Manuscript  With  an  Introduction  by  John  A.  Doyle,  London 
and  Boston,  and  in  1900  after  the  return  of  the  Bradford  MS. 
to  America  by  the  publication  of  another  edition  at  Boston  by 
the  State  of  Massachusetts.  Still  another  American  edition 
has  appeared  in  the  series  of  Original  Narratives  of  Early 
American  History  edited  by  Dr  J.  F.  Jameson  of  the  Carnegie 
Institution  at  Washington.  Of  these  different  editions  Mr 
Doyle's  no  doubt  is  decidedly  the  best,  though  not  the  most 
convenient  in  form.  In  1858  J.  S.  Clark  brought  out  a  small 
volume  entitled  A  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Congregational 
Churches  in  Massachusetts. 

Other  works  followed  in  rapid  succession.  In  1860  two 
historical  studies  of  interest  appeared,  namely  S.  G.  Drake's 
quarto  book  entitled,  Result  of  some  Researches  among  the 
British  Archives  for  Information  relative  to  the  Founders  of 
New  England:  made  in  the  years  1858,  1859  and  1860,  Boston 
[Mass.],  and  Ope7i  Communion  and  the  Baptists  of  Norwich :..  .vnth 
an  Introduction  by  the  Rev.  Geo.  Gould.  This  introduction  by 
Mr  Gould  was  the  first  really  valuable  critical  piece  of  work 
produced  by  a  Baptist  concerning  the  long  forgotten  early 
history  of  the  denomination.  Mr  Gould  went  to  the  originals 
for  his  information,  and  by  so  doing  in  comparatively  few  pages 
threw  fresh  light  on  various  traditions  concerning  the  rise  of 
the  present  Baptist  Denomination.  His  work  strangely  seems 
to  have  circulated  among  those  who  could  not  appreciate  what 
he  had  to  say.  He  was  nearly  two  generations  before  his  time. 
It  was  from  a  study  of  this  book,  that  the  discovery  was  made 
by  President  Whitsitt  that  the  English  Anabaptists  did  not 
practise  immersion  until  about  1641. 

Tn  1861  D.  A.  White  published  at  Salem  his  New  England 
Congregationalism  in  its  origin  and  purity ;  illustrated  by  the 
foundation  and  early  records  of  the  First  Church  in  Salem,  etc., 
and  in  1862  appeared  the  second  volume  of  J.  B.  Felt's  Eccle- 
siastical History  of  New  England,  etc.     These  were  followed  in 


12  Early  English  Dissenters 

1863  by  [Dr]  John  Waddington's  book  bearing  the  curious  title, 
1559-1620.  Track  of  the  Hidden  Church;  or,  The  Springs  of  the 
Pilgrim  Movement,  etc.  This  was  Waddington's  fourth  published 
work,  pertaining  to  Congi'egational  Church  history,  his  first  on 
John  Penry  having  been  published  in  1854,  His  second  was 
entitled  Historical  Papers  [First  SeriesJ,  etc.,  and  appeared  in 
1861.  His  third  came  out  in  1862  under  the  title,  '^Bicentenary 
Prize  Essay.  Congregational  History.  From  the  Reformation 
to  1662  ".  The  success  of  this  essay  evidently  led  Waddington 
to  undertake  his  large  work  on  Congregational  History.  The 
first  volume  was  published  in  1869,  and  covered  the  period 
1200-1567.  This  was  followed  at  intervals  until  1878  by 
three  others,  the  second  of  the  series  appearing  in  1874,  and 
covering  the  years  1567-1700.  Thus  Dr  Waddington  in 
twenty-four  years  prepared  an  unusually  large  amount  of 
historical  material  for  the  press.  Nor  is  it  only  by  the  amount 
of  his  production  that  he  is  distinguished.  With  all  their 
defects  his  works  reveal  a  truly  vast  knowledge,  Waddington's 
two  worst  faults  as  an  historian  are  (1)  his  too  apparent  lack  of 
critical  and  minute  exactness  (though  his  publisher  and  printer 
were  possibly  responsible  for  some  minor  errors,  as,  for  instance, 
in  dates),  and  (2)  his  almost  constant  practice  of  neglecting 
to  give  the  exact  location  of  the  manuscripts  to  which  he 
makes  reference.  Waddington's  books,  indeed,  are  filled  with 
inaccuracies  and  small  errors,  which  are  just  numerous  and 
important  enough  to  make  the  reader  uncertain  whether  any- 
thing published  by  him  is  exactly  as  it  should  be.  His  work, 
therefore,  to  be  of  any  value  to-day  would  require  thorough 
verification  and  rewriting,  as  may  have  been  realized  by 
Dr  R.  W.  Dale  years  ago.  Dr  Waddington's  strong  point 
was  his  wide  knowledge  of  the  MSS.  relating  to  his  subject. 
Returning  to  the  year  1862  we  find  that  it  was  during  this 
and  the  two  following  years  that  Dr  B.  Evans  published  his 
Early  English  Baptists  in  two  small  volumes.  With  the 
exception  of  the  Rev.  George  Gould  of  Norwich,  Dr  Evans  is 
much  the  ablest  of  the  early  English  Baptist  historical  writers, 
and  he  secured  for  his  history  documents  that  no  one  in  England 
at  least  had  previously  published.     These  opened  a  whole  new 


Introduction  13 

field  of  research,  and  furnished  many  important  facts  hitherto 
unmentioned  and  unsuspected.  He  had,  too,  the  mind  of  a  true 
historian,  and  saw  clearly  that  he  lived  at  too  early  a  period  to 
write  anything  approaching  an  adequate  history  of  the  English 
Baptists,  but  he  also  saw  that  the  day  was  coming  when  such 
a  work  could  be  accomplished.  Evans's  work,  however,  excellent 
as  it  is  in  some  respects,  has  its  defects.  The  texts  of  the 
documents  cited  are  chiefly  in  English,  as  they  were  translated 
by  a  Dutch  professor,  and  so  are  not  always  expressed  in  correct 
English.  The  material  secured  from  Holland  is  also  not  con- 
veniently arranged,  and  the  treatment  of  the  political  situation 
of  the  times  is  rather  extended.  Furthermore,  Dr  Evans's 
personal  knowledge  of  the  printed  sources  of  early  Baptist 
history  seems  to  have  been  limited,  and  it  is  only  in  dealing 
with  the  translation  of  the  Dutch  manuscripts  made  for  him, 
and  in  presenting  other  material  furnished  by  Professor  Dr 
Mliller  of  Amsterdam,  that  he  says  anything  especially  new. 
Although  Dr  E.  B.  Underbill  appears  to  have  been  the  first 
Englishman  in  recent  times  to  gain  an  idea  of  the  contents  of 
the  Mennonite  Archives  in  Amsterdam,  Dr  Evans  deserves 
the  credit  of  being  the  first  to  present  translations  of  the  texts 
of  many  of  these  early  MSS.  to  the  British  and  American 
public. 

In  1867  H.  S.  Skeats  brought  out,  and  republished  in  1869, 
A  History  of  the  Free  Churches  of  England  from  1688-1851. 
The  book  is  popular  and  of  little  value  in  itself,  but  the  idea  of 
grouping  the  different  bodies  of  separatists  together  is  good. 
In  1868  Herman  Weingarten  of  the  University  of  Berlin 
published  his  work,  well  known  in  Germany,  entitled.  Die 
Revolutionskirchen  Englands,  etc.  The  first  forty-five  or  more 
pages  relate  to  the  period  before  1641,  so  that  this  work  may 
be  suitably  mentioned  here,  though  its  contribution  to  our 
subject  is  small.  The  book  also  is  long  out  of  date.  In  1874 
Dr  Leonard  Bacon's  work  on  The  Genesis  of  the  New  England 
Churches  appeared. 

Two  years  later  came  out  the  first  edition  of  Robert  Barclay's 
admirable  volume,  entitled.  The  Inner  Life  of  the  Religious 
Societies  of  the  Commonwealth,  etc.    This  has  been  at  least  twice 


14  Early  English  Dissenters 

reprinted  and  is  in  some  respects  one  of  the  best  books  that  have 
yet  been  published  relating  to  English  separatism.  In  a  sense,  it 
must  be  admitted,  it  is  a  denominational  (Friends'  or  Quakers') 
work,  but  it  deals  to  a  large  extent  with  all  early  English 
separatists.  The  book  manifests  wide  and  critical  reading  on 
the  part  of  the  author  and  a  considerable  knowledge  of  the 
contents  of  certain  libraries  up  to  that  time  little  investigated. 
Nevertheless,  great  as  is  Barcla3^'s  contribution  to  separatist 
history,  his  book  shows  that  he  was  ignorant  of  the  existence  of 
many  important  works.  He  was  fortunate,  however,  in  having 
made  the  best  use  of  various  unique  books,  and  in  the  expression 
of  his  conclusions  he  was  at  once  impartial  and  critical.  Some 
of  these  conclusions  are  of  much  value. 

In  1879  appeared  Mr  Edward  Arber's  An  Introductory 
Sketch  to  the  Martin  Marpr elate  Controversy,  1588-1590  (No.  8 
in  the  English  Scholar's  Library).  The  publication  of  this 
volume,  of  a  subsequent  work  by  Dr  F.  J.  Powicke  mentioned 
later,  and  of  still  another  study  published  in  the  autumn  of 
1908  by  the  Rev.  W.  Pierce,  entitled,  An  Historical  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Marprelate  Tracts,  London,  makes  it  unnecessary 
for  the  present  writer  to  deal  further  with  the  subject.  These 
authors  have  rendered  untenable  Dr  Dexter's  opinion  that 
Martin  Marprelate  was  Henry  Barrowe. 

The  year  1880  was  notable  in  the  field  of  separatist  history 
on  account  of  the  publication  of  Dr  Henry  Martjrn  Dexter's 
epoch-making  book  entitled,  The  Congregationalism  of  the  last 
three  hundred  years  as  seen  in  its  Literature.  This  undoubtedly 
was  the  most  learned  work  of  the  kind  up  to  that  time  produced 
by  an  American  scholar,  and  in  the  present  writer's  opinion 
surpasses  even  to-day  in  minute  critical,  detailed  and  vast 
knowledge  anything  that  has  been  done  in  this  line  either  by 
historians  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  by  English  Dissenters. 
What  might  be  called  the  period  of  the  "  Higher  Criticism  "  of 
separatist  history  now  really  began,  though  for  nearly  fifteen 
years  Dr  Dexter's  contemporaries  seem  to  have  thought  that 
little  more  remained  to  be  done  in  the  way  of  writing  a  general 
scientific  Congregational  History.  Dr  Waddington's  great  work 
was  at  once  superseded  by  the  appearance  of  this  single  volume. 


Introduction  16 

which,  though  containing  a  good  many  errors  of  one  kind  and 
another,  was  nevertheless  well  packed  with  exact  learning.  In 
1881  Dr  Dexter  also  gave  the  American  Baptists  a  shock  of 
surprise  by  publishing  The  True  Story  of  John  Smyth,  the  Se- 
Baptist,  a  book  pertaining  to  early  English  Baptist  history,  and 
so  contrary  to  all  accepted  tradition  that  it  excited  no  little 
comment.  So  quickly  were  the  old-fashioned,  uncritical,  deno- 
minational histories  made  almost  valueless. 

Of  course,  it  was  soon  seen  that  there  were  occasional  points 
in  Congregational  history  which  needed  still  further  attention. 
Accordingly  a  useful  pamphlet  was  brought  out  in  1889  by 
Messrs  Wm  E.  A.  Axon  aud  Ernest  Axon,  entitled,  Henry 
Ainsworth,  the  Puritan  Commentator... {Reprinted  from  the 
"  Transactions  of  the  Lancashire  and  Cheshire  Antiquarian 
Society",  1888.),  Manchester,  8°,  pp.  43-57  (41-2  blank). 
This  incorporates  the  results  of  still  earlier  investigations  con- 
cerning the  subject  made  by  Mr  Ernest  Axon,  and  gives  some 
details  of  Ainsworth's  life  not  generally  known.  In  this  way 
the  attention  of  a  wider  circle  of  students  was  directed  to  the 
really  reliable  testimony  relating  to  Ainsworth's  death,  which 
had  previously  been  published  in  a  leaflet  by  Mr  Ernest  Axon. 

Thus  the  period  of  reconstruction  began,  but  so  well  had 
Dr  Dexter  done  his  work,  as  has  been  said,  that  it  was  not  until 
1893  that  any  other  extended  contribution  to  general  early 
separatist  history  was  made.  In  that  year  Professor  Williston 
Walker,  then  of  Hartford  Theological  Seminary,  and  now  of 
Yale  University,  brought  out  his  admirable  volume  entitled, 
The  Creeds  and  Platforms  of  Congregatianalism,  and  in  1894, 
A  History  of  the  Congregational  Churches  in  the  United  States. 
Of  these  two  publications  the  former,  though  up  to  this  time 
unfortunately  little  known  in  England,  is  indispensable.  Indeed, 
the  writer  believes  that  it  is  one  of  the  three  or  four  best  and 
most  scholarly  books  relating  to  Congregational  history  yet 
published.  It  is  unpartizan  in  tone,  independent  in  thought, 
and  replete  with  minute  knowledge. 

Professor  Williston  Walker's  books  have  been  followed  in 
close  succession  by  the  publication  of  other  important  works. 
Among  these  may  be  mentioned  Dr  John  Brown's  The  Pilgrim 


16  Early  English  Dissenters 

Fathers  and  their  Puritan  Successors,  1895,  a  book  especially 
pleasing  for  its  literary  qualities ;  by  Dr  Ozora  Stearns  Davis's 
pamphlet,  entitled,  John  Robinson  Pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers 
His  Life,  Controversies  and  Personality  Displayed  in  their 
Historical  Connections,  1897 ;  and  by  Mr  Edward  Arber's 
illuminating  and  critical  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  1606- 
1623  A.D. ;  as  told  by  Themselves,  their  Friends,  and  their 
Enemies.  Edited  fram  the  original  Texts,  published  in  1897. 
This  is  an  incisive,  critical  study,  not  always  quite  fair,  and  yet 
full  of  suggestion.  The  book  certainly  contains  mistakes  in  spite 
of  the  author's  "great  desire... that  there  should  be  nothing 
in  this  Volume  that  the  Reader  may  be  hereafter  compelled 
to  unlearn  ",  but  it  is  nevertheless,  in  all  probability,  the  most 
exact  work  on  the  subject  that  has  yet  been  written. 

In  1897  [i.e.,  Sept.,  1896],  President  William  H.  Whitsitt 
of  the  Southern  Baptist  Theological  Seminary,  Louisville, 
Kentucky,  also  brought  out  his  little  book,  A  Question  in 
Baptist  History:  Whether  the  Anabaptists  in  England  Practised 
Immersion  before  the  year  1641  ?  With  an  Appendix  on  the 
Baptism  of  Roger  Williams,  at  Providence,  R.I.,  in  1639.  This 
work  defied  Baptist  tradition,  and  it  has  been  thought  that 
Dr  Whitsitt  indirectly  through  its  publication  lost  his  position. 
In  this  book  he  showed  that  he,  and  not  Dr  Dexter,  was  the 
original  discoverer  of  the  1641  theory,  and  that  Dr  Dexter  had 
really  accepted  and  sustained  the  view  which  he  (Whitsitt) 
had  anonymously  published  in  the  New  York  Independent  for 
September  2nd  and  9th,  1880.  President  Whitsitt  was  at  once 
vigorously  attacked  by  various  writers \  but  subsequent  investi- 
gations have  abundantly  justified  the  most  of  his  contentions. 
Concerning  this  discussion  the  following  books  may  repay 
study,  viz.,  two  by  Dr  George  A.  Lofton,  entitled,  English 
Baptist  Reformatiun.  (From  1609  to  1641  A.D.),  and  Defense  of 
the  Jessey  Records  and  Kifin  Manuscript...,  both  published  in 
1899,  and  two  articles  published  in  The  Baptist  Review  and 
Expositor  for  October,  1905  and  January,  1906,  respectively, 
the  first  by  the  present  writer,  and  entitled,  A  Brief  Exami- 

'  Among  these  opponents  was  Dr  John  T.  Christian,  who  wrote  two 
books  and  numerous  articles  relating  to  the  controversy. 


Introduction  17 

nation  of  the  Gould  Manuscript,  which  in  an  improved  and 
corrected  form  is  republished  in  this  work;  and  the  second 
by  Dr  W.  T.  Whitley  on  Four  Early  Separatistic  Churches  in 
London. 

In  1899  the  Congregational  Historical  Society  was  formed 
and  since  April,  1901,  has  published  Transactions  and  three 
special  pamphlets.  In  the  Transactions  some  important  material 
has  already  appeared,  which  has  well  justified  the  existence  of 
the  Society.  Articles  by  the  Rev.  T.  G.  Crippen,  the  Rev. 
F.  Ives  Cater,  and  the  Rev.  F.  J.  Powicke,  M.A.,  Ph.D.,  will 
especially  repay  examination. 

In  1900  an  interesting  book  was  published  from  the  pen  of 
Dr  Powicke,  entitled,  Henry  Barrow,  and  the  Exiled  Church  of 
Amsterdam.  This  work  is  popular,  readable,  and  on  the  whole 
far  more  scholarly  in  tone  than  the  usual  popular  denominational 
history.  It  does  not  pretend  to  present  much  fresh  material, 
but  seeks  chiefly  to  take  account  of  what  others  had  previously 
gathered.  The  author  is  fair-minded  and  pacific  in  spirit,  while 
his  critical  ability  is  seen  to  good  advantage  in  the  final  chapter 
of  Part  II.,  where  he  examines  and  overthrows  some  of  Mr  Arber's 
too  hasty  statements  concerning  Francis  Johnson's  congregation 
at  Amsterdam.  If  Dr  Powicke  had  only  been  equally  careful 
to  correct  the  mistakes  of  earlier  Congregational  historians, 
his  book  as  a  whole  would  have  a  still  higher  value. 

In  1901  Dr  Alexander  Mackennal  brought  out  his  Sketches 
in  the  Evolution  of  English  Congregationalism  Carew  Lecture 
for  1900-01  Delivered  in  Hartford  Theological  Seminary 
Connecticut,  London,  12°.  The  work  is  popular,  and  its  in- 
formation is  largely  dependent  on  the  researches  of  previous 
writers.  It  is  for  our  purposes,  therefore,  a  book  more  important 
in  title  than  in  content. 

In  1905  appeared  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Shakespeare's  little  volume 
entitled,  Baptist  and  Congregational  Pioneers.  This  is  a  popular 
book,  unpartizan  in  tone,  and  written  in  a  readable  and  at- 
tractive style.  The  author  has  made  some  study  of  the  sources, 
and  has  thus  added  to  the  value  of  his  work. 

In  1905,  also,  Dr  Roland  G.  Usher  published  in  the  Cam- 
den Society  series   a  useful   book   entitled.   The  Presbyterian 


18  Early  Eiu/lish  Dissenters 

Movement  in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  as  illustrated  hy  the 
Minute  Book  of  the  Dedham  Classis  1582-1589  Edited  for  the 
Royal  Historical  Society  from  the  MS.  in  the  possession  of 
J.  F.  Gurney,  Esquire  Keswick  Hall,  Norfolk.  In  this  work 
one  may  notice  the  connection  which  a  few  of  the  early 
Barrowists  had  previously  maintained  with  the  Presbyterian 
movement.  Future  investigation  ought  to  add  materially  to 
the  minor  results  contained  in  the  work. 

During  1906  and  1907  two  extended  and  important  post- 
humous works  appeared.  One  of  these  was  begun  by  Dr 
Henry  Martyn  Dexter  and  finished  and  published  by  his  son,  the 
late  Rev.  Morton  Dexter,  entitled.  The  England  and  Holland 
of  the  Pilgrims,  1906.  This  is  probably  in  its  spirit  the  least 
partizan  of  Dr  Dexter's  publications.  Like  all  posthumous 
books,  however,  it  has  the  fault  of  not  being  thoroughly  up 
to  date,  and  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  Mr  Morton  Dexter  did 
not  further  verify  some  of  the  statements  made  in  the  work. 
With  a  little  investigation  mistakes  might  have  been  avoided, 
and  important  material,  which  is  not  employed,  might  have  been 
added.  The  account  of  Robert  Browne,  for  instance,  needs  to  be 
entirely  rewritten.  Some  parts  of  the  volume  are  naturally 
fresher  and  therefore  more  instructive  than  others,  but  regarded 
as  a  whole  it  is  an  unusually  valuable  book.  It  would  be  worth 
while  to  publish  a  second  corrected  edition.  In  the  opinion  of 
the  present  writer  the  best  parts  of  the  work,  as  it  stands,  are 
chapters  four  and  five  in  Book  II.,  concerning  the  literature  of 
the  early  Puritans  and  their  opponents  ;  the  whole  of  Book  V., 
which  treats  of  the  Pilgrims  in  Amsterdam ;  and  the  Appendix 
giving  the  names  of  the  Pilgrim  company  in  Leyden,  etc. 

The  other  notable  posthumous  work,  to  which  reference  has 
been  made,  is  Dr  R.  W.  Dale's  History  of  English  Congrega- 
tionalism, 1907,  which  was  completed  and  published  by  his  son 
Chancellor  A.  W.  W.  Dale.  This  is  a  popular  and  fair-minded 
book  of  nearly  eight  hundred  pages,  and  is  scholarly,  well- 
written,  and  fairly  up  to  date.  The  material,  too,  is  well 
arranged  and  has  been  made  very  readable,  by  subdividing  the 
chapters  into  short  sections.  Naturally  Dr  Dexter's  minute 
scholarship  is  not  to  be  seen  here.   The  spelling  of  the  citations 


Introduction  19 

has  been  modernized,  and  there  is  little  or  no  addition  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  source  literature.  The  chief  excellency  of  this 
work  is  that  it  puts  into  readable  form,  and  in  comparatively 
small  compass,  the  scattered  or  disordered  results  of  the  studies 
of  earlier  writers.  Another  book  which  may  be  mentioned  here, 
is  the  illustrated  edition  of  Professor  Henry  C.  Vedder's  A  Short 
History  of  the  Baptists,  first  published  at  Philadelphia  in  1891, 
and  since  revised  and  enlarged.  Though  only  a  popular  work 
this  is  scientific  in  spirit,  and  generally  up  to  date. 

In  November,  1908,  the  first  number  of  the  Transactions  of 
the  Baptist  Historical  Society  was  published,  and  since  that 
time  at  somewhat  irregular  intervals  other  numbers  have  ap- 
peared. These  have  contained  interesting  and  useful  historical 
information,  and  have  been  well  edited  by  the  industrious 
Secretary,  Dr  W.  T.  Whitley.  The  Society  has  also  brought 
out  two  volumes  of  Minutes  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
General  Baptist  Churches  in  England,  with  kindred  Records; 
Edited  with  Introduction  and  Notes  by  Dr  Whitley.  Vol.  I., 
published  in  1909,  covers  the  years  1654-1728,  and  Vol.  ii., 
published  in  1910,  the  years  1731-1811.  The  material  con- 
tained herein  should  prove  of  value  to  historians. 

In  1909  Miss  Winifred  Cockshot  of  St  Hilda's  Hall,  Oxford, 
brought  out  at  London  a  popular  work  entitled.  The  Pilgrim 
Fathers  their  Church  and  Colony. . .  With  twelve  illustrations  and 
a  Map.  Miss  Cockshot  seeks  to  utilize  the  results  of  the  most 
recent  researches  relating  to  her  subject,  but  apparently  has 
not  herself  attempted  to  do  much  research  work.  Though  not 
always  quite  accurate,  this  is  probably  as  good  a  popular  history 
of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  as  has  been  published. 

Mention  should  finally  be  made  of  Dr  Frederick  J.  Powicke's 
Robert  Browne  Pioneer  of  Modern  Congregationalism,  Memorial 
Hall,  London  [autumn,  1910],  a  popular,  but  excellent  little 
book,  which  deserves  a  wide  circulation.  Dr  Powicke  has 
made  use  of  the  latest  researches  concerning  Browne,  and  has 
done  his  work  with  care  and  insight.  Accordingly,  his  book 
is  indispensable  to  those  who  are  interested  in  Browne's 
career,  and  is  undoubtedly  the  best  life  of  Browne  that  has  yet 
appeared. 

2—2 


20  Early  English  Dissenters 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  especially  during  the  last  fifty 
years  some  excellent  work  has  been  done  in  the  field  of  separatist 
history.  Indeed,  before  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century 
it  was  practically  impossible  to  do  good  critical  work,  for  the 
eighteenth  century  was  uncritical  in  spirit,  and  the  persons  who 
were  most  interested  in  separatist  history  could  not  easily  gain 
access  to  much  of  the  material  they  needed  to  consult.  However, 
the  few  early  English  dissenting  historians  (and,  with  the  exception 
of  the  earlier  writers  in  New  England,  they  were  mostly  Friends 
or  Baptists)  accomplished  a  good  deal  under  disadvantageous 
conditions,  and  probably  made  no  more  mistakes  than  other 
historians  of  the  period.  Towards  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century  access  to  interesting  historical  collections  became  more 
possible,  and  with  the  spread  of  the  German  critical  temper,  with 
improved  facilities  for  research,  and  with  an  increasing  interest 
in  historical  investigation,  better  work  soon  began  to  be  done. 
This  can  easily  be  seen  by  examining  the  historical  writings  of 
Benjamin  Hanbury,  Dr  John  Waddington,  Mr  Robert  Barclay, 
Dr  Henry  Martyn  Dexter,  Professor  Williston  Walker,  Mr  Edward 
Arber,  President  William  H.  Whitsitt,  Dr  F.  J.  Powicke,  Dr 
R.  W.  Dale,  and  others. 

Most  of  the  writers  just  named  have  added  something  to 
our  knowledge,  and  all  of  them  have  been  much  more  exact  in 
their  expression  than  the  earlier  writers.  Nevertheless  much 
of  the  material  that  has  been  published  even  during  the  last 
thirty  years  has  been  derived  from  secondary  rather  than 
primary  sources,  and  without  the  necessary  critical  examination, 
thereby  perpetuating  a  good  many  errors  of  greater  or  less  im- 
portance. In  fact,  until  recent  years  neither  a  sufficient  attack 
on  the  errors  of  tradition,  nor  a  sufficient  search  to  locate  and 
utilize  unknown  or  unused  books  and  manuscripts  had  been 
made. 

Some  of  the  results  of  the  writer's  previous  researches  have 
been  published  under  the  following  titles : 

(a)  A  "New  Years  Ouift"  an  hitherto  lost  Treatise  hy 
Robert  Browne  The  Father  of  Congregationalism  In  the  form  of 
a  Letter  to  his  Uncle  Mr.  Flower  Written  December  ^\st,  1588 
{Old  Style)  and  now  first  published.     Edited  with  an  Introduc- 


Inti'odnction  21 

tion  for  the  Congregational  Historical  Society ,  London,  8°,  1904 
[January  1]. 

This  treatise  was  the  source  from  which  Richard  Bancroft, 
later  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  took  one  of  his  citations  for  his 
famous  '  Sermon  preached  at  Pavles  Crosse  the  9.  of  Februarie,' 
1588  [i.e.  1589].  The  discovery  of  this  document  served  to 
correct  some  mistaken  opinions  concerning  Browne. 

(6)  The  Church  Covenant  Idea  Its  Origin  and  Its  Develop- 
ment, Philadelphia,  1904  [October],  pp.  230. 

This  supplies  a  chapter  in  Congregational  and  Baptist 
history  that  has  hitherto  been  overlooked,  and  might  be  termed 
a  supplement  to  Professor  Williston  Walker's  The  Creeds  and 
Platforms  of  Congregationalism.  Like  that  work  it  seeks  to 
preserve  and  make  available  the  texts  of  important  historical 
documents. 

(c)  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne  (1550  ?-l 633)  Father 
of  Congregationalism  including  various  points  hitherto  unknown 
or  misunderstood,  with  some  account  of  the  development  of  his 
religious  views,  and  an  extended  and  improved  list  of  his 
writings.     Oxford  and  London,  8°,  1906,  pp.  viii,  75. 

This  attempts  a  reconstruction  of  Browne's  life  based  on  the 
discovery  of  new  facts  and  of  the  two  most  extended  MSS.  of 
Browne's  apparently  still  extant. 

{d)  The  'Retractation  of  Robert  Browne  Father  of  Congre- 
gationalism Being  'A  Reproof e  of  Certeine  Schismatical  Persons 
[i.e.,  Henry  Barrowe,  John  Greenwood,  and  their  Congregation] 
and  their  Doctrine  touching  the  Hearing  and  Preaching  of  the 
Word  of  God'  Written  probably  early  in  the  year  1588  since 
lost,  and  now  first  published  with  a  br-ief  account  of  its  discovery. 
Oxford  and  London,  8°,  1907,  pp.  viii,  65. 

(e)  "  A  Tercentenary  Memorial  New  Facts  concerning  John 
Robinson  Pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers... With  Facsimile  Front- 
ispiece."    Oxford  and  London,  8°,  1910,  pp.  i,  35. 

This  announces  the  discovery  of  a  manuscript  hitherto  un- 
known to  historians,  which  contains  citations  from  a  lost  writing 
by  Robinson,  and  makes  known  for  the  first  time  among  other 
points  the  church  in  which  he  officiated  before  he  became  a 
separatist. 


22  Early  English  Dissenters 


II.    Collections  of  printed  books  and  manuscripts  that 

SHOULD  BE  VISITED  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  EARLY  ENGLISH 
dissenting  HISTORY  (wiTH  NOTES  UPON  THE  STRONG 
POINTS   OF   EACH   LIBRARY) 

Fortunately  the  source  literature  still  extant  on  this  subject 
during  the  period  in  question  is  considerable.  Manuscripts, 
however,  are  exceedingly  scarce,  and  on  some  points  of  interest 
before  1582  there  is  very  little  direct  information  to  be  found. 
Furthermore,  the  material  to  be  consulted  is  so  widely  scat- 
tered that  the  student  must  be  at  some  inconvenience  before 
he  can  personally  examine  it  all. 

The  collections  in  the  following  libraries  are  among  those 
most  abundantly  supplied  with  the  works  of  the  earliest  English 
separatists  and  with  the  writings  of  their  opponents. 

1.  The  Library  of  the  British  Museum.  This  great  library 
is  probably  the  richest  of  the  world  in  literature,  both  printed 
and  in  manuscript,  concerning  our  subject.  Among  its  manu- 
scripts are  some  of  priceless  value.  In  its  collections  of  books, 
it  is  true,  there  were  a  good  many  important  items  wanting 
fifteen  years  ago,  but  copies  of  a  number  of  these  have  been 
secured  during  the  intervening  years. 

Among  its  manuscripts  the  following  may  be  especially 
mentioned : 

(a)  "  M"  [Robert]  Brownes  aunswer  to  M""  Flowers 
letter,"  written  December  31,  1588  (O.S.),  and  published  in 
1904  under  the  title  A  New  Years  Ouift. 

(6)  Robert  Browne's  letter  to  Lord  Burghley  of  April  15, 
1590,  regarding  his  (Browne's)  '  treatise '  concerning  '  the  arts 
&  the  rules  &  tearmes  of  Art.' 

(c)  Harleian  MSS.  6848  and  6849,  which  contain  a 
large  number  of  original  papers,  or  contemporary  copies  of 
them,  relating  to  the  earliest  Barrowists. 

{d)  Volume  i.  of  the  Boswell  Papers  containing  many 
important  and  hitherto  largely  unused  letters  and  documents 


Introduction  23 

pertaining  to  the  history  of  the  English  (separatist  and  non- 
separatist)  Churches  in  the  Netherlands  during  a  good  part 
of  the  period  under  discussion. 

Among  the  printed  books  may  be  found  : 

(a)  Practically  all  the  first  and  later  editions  of  the 
works  issued  by  the  English  Family  of  Love  as  well  as  by  their 
opponents. 

(6)  Most  of  the  published  works  of  the  early  Puritans, 
Brownists,  Barrowists,  English  Anabaptists,  and  their  opponents. 

2.  The  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford.  This  library  is  extremely 
well  supplied  with  printed  books  and  pamphlets  of  the  period. 
For  nearly  three  centuries  it  has  contained  these  books,  and 
has  therefore  some  important  works  of  which  no  other  library 
possesses  a  copy.  There  are  also  a  few  early  manuscripts 
relating  to  the  subject. 

3.  Lambeth  Palace  Library,  London.  This  library  like  the 
two  preceding  is  of  the  fii-st  importance,  for  though  its  collections 
are  far  less  numerous  than  those  of  the  British  Museum  and 
of  the  Bodleian,  and  though  it  has  much  less  complete  lists 
of  the  works  of  the  various  separatist  leaders  than  either  of 
these  libraries,  it  is  especially  rich  in  unique  or  exceptionally 
scarce  books,  pamphlets,  and  manuscripts,  which  Archbishop 
Bancroft  collected  and  left  at  his  death  as  the  foundation 
collection  of  what  is  now  known  as  Lambeth  Palace  Library. 
Without  this  priceless  collection  of  Bancroft's  much  of  the 
early  history  of  separatism  would  be  entirely  unknown  to-day, 
or  known  only  from  the  works  of  its  enemies,  or  by  tradition. 
The  persecuted  separatists  dared  keep  but  scanty  records  of 
their  activities  and  views,  and  most  of  their  books  were  soon 
destroyed,  yet  by  the  irony  of  history  one  of  their  greatest  foes 
became  the  custodian  of  their  productions,  and  founded  the 
library  that  has  preserved  for  three  hundred  years  many  an 
unknown  fact  of  their  history. 

Among  its  treasures  are : 

(1)     The  three  following  writings  of  Robert  Browne, — 
(a)     A    Trve    and   Short   Declaration    [1583  ?],   printed 
pamphlet. 


24  Early  English  Dissenters 

(b)  An  answere  to  M""  Cartwrights  Letter,  MS.  [1584/5?]. 

(c)  A    reproofe  of  certeine  schismatical   persons,   MS. 

[1588  ?]. 

(2)  The  recently  rediscovered  Papers  of  Henry  Jacob  of 
1603-5,  MS. 

(3)  An  hitherto  unnoticed  letter  of  [Thomas]  Helwys 
(EllwesO  of  September  26,  1608,  MS. 

4.  The  Mennonite  Archives,  Amsterdam.  This  library 
contains  among  its  numerous  treasures  an  unrivalled  collection 
of  unique  Dutch,  Latin,  and  English  MSS.  pertaining  to  the 
early  English  Anabaptist  Congregations. 

5.  The  Public  Record  Office,  London.  This  contains 
important,  unique  manuscripts  pertaining  to  the  subject  in 
hand.  Here  Dr  Waddington  found  material  relating  to  Richard 
Fitz's  congregation.  Here  also  is  a  petition  of  Francis  Johnson 
and  some  of  his  followers  to  be  allowed  to  emigrate  to  Canada, 
and  there  are  other  interesting  items. 

6.  York  Minster  Library.  This  has  two  or  three  unique 
works  of  the  early  English  Anabaptists,  but  it  is  neither  so 
well  provided  with  material  pertaining  to  the  subject,  nor  so 
accessible,  as  Lambeth  Palace  Library. 

7.  The  University  Library,  Cambridge.  While  not  so  rich 
as  the  Bodleian  in  this  particular  class  of  literature,  this  library 
contains  various  important  printed  books  of  the  period  and  one 
or  two  MSS.,  which  will  be  mentioned  later. 

8.  The  Library  of  the  House  of  Iiords.  This  library  has 
an  undated  manuscript  petition  of  Helwys  and  Murton's 
congregation  written  in  1614. 

9.  Dr  Williams's  Library,  London.  This  has  many 
important  printed  books  and  one  or  two  manuscripts  relating 
to  the  present  subject.  Special  mention  should  be  made  of 
the  thick  folio  in  manuscript  entitled  The  second  parte  of  a 
Register,  the  contents  of  which  it  is  to  be  hoped  may  soon  be 
published. 

*  Elwes.  ^ 


Introduction  25 

10.  Trinity  College  Library,  Cambridge.  This  most 
beautiful  and  choicest  of  all  the  College  Libraries  of  England 
has  a  good  many  printed  books  relating  to  the  present  subject 
including  a  copy  of  George  Johnson's  A  discourse  of  some 
troubles  /  and  excommunications  in  the  banished  English  Church 
at  Amsterdam,  1603. 

11.  Emmanuel  College  Library,  Cambridge.  This  contains 
the  only  known  copy  of  John  Smyth's  first  published  work, 
entitled,  The  BHght  Morning  Starre,  1603,  also  much  of  the 
general  religious  literature  of  the  period  under  discussion. 

12.  The  Congregational  Library,  London.  The  main 
collection  of  this  library  was  made  by  Mr  Joshua  Wilson 
during  a  period  covering  many  years.  Like  Dr  Williams's 
Library  it  contains  numerous  important  items. 

There  are  also  several  works  of  interest  for  this  period  to  be 
found  in  the  libraries  of  Queens'  College  and  of  St  John's 
College,  Cambridge;  in  the  Angus  Library,  Regent's  Park 
College,  London ;  in  the  Chetham  Library,  Manchester ;  and 
in  the  Library  of  the  Inner  Temple,  London.  The  last  of  these 
possesses  the  hitherto  unnoticed  original  of  the  letter  by  William 
Burghley  to  Archbishop  Whitgifb,  dated  July  17, 1584,  formerly 
supposed  to  refer  to  Robert  Browne,  but  believed  by  the  present 
writer  to  refer  to  Edward  Brayne.  The  Oxford  college  libraries ; 
the  John  Rylands  Library,  Manchester;  Sion  College  Library, 
and  St  Paul's  Library,  London,  as  yet  appear  not  to  be 
unusually  rich  in  English  separatist  literature  of  the  period  at 
present  under  consideration. 

In  America  the  most  valuable  collections  of  material  relating 
to  our  subject  during  this  period  are  probably  to  be  found  in 
the  Library  of  Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass.;  the 
Public  Library,  the  Atheneum  Library,  the  Library  of  the 
Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  and  the  Congregational  House 
Library,  Boston,  Mass. ;  the  Library  of  Yale  University  (Dexter 
Collection),  New  Haven,  Conn,;  the  Lenox  Library,  and  the 
Library  of  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York  City. 


26  Early  English  Dissenters 


III.    Notes  relating  to  the  contents  of  the 

FOLLOWING    PAGES 

1.  The  literature  concerning  the  English  Anabaptists  before 
1641  has  been  carefully  examined,  and  what  is  believed  to  be 
an  unusually  complete  list  of  such  works  is  here  presented. 

2.  The  titles  are  given  of  certain  books  printed  during  the 
years  1550-1641,  of  which  the  writer  has  been  unable  to  find  a 
copy.  These  are  mentioned  in  the  hope  that  some  of  the  works 
may  be  found,  and  to  indicate  a  task  that  still  needs  to  be 
undertaken. 

3.  The  history  of  the  early  English  separatist  and  indepen- 
dent congregations  is  critically  reconstructed,  and  special  atten- 
tion is  given  to  their  interrelation,  which  tended  toward  the 
gradual  evolution  of  a  well-developed  type  of  separatist  church. 

4.  The  early  conventiclers  at  Faversham  and  Booking,  who 
since  the  time  of  Dr  Gilbert  Burnet  have  been  known  as  either 
Anabaptists  or  separatists,  were  apparently  only  non-separatist 
Nonconformists  of  an  unusual  type. 

5.  Neither  the  so-called  Baptist  church  at  "  Eyethom,"  nor 
any  other  mythical  early  Baptist  churches  in  England,  existed 
as  Anabaptist  congregations  before  1612,  and  indeed  not  until 
a  much  later  date. 

6.  The  name  "  Baptist "  or  "  Baptists  "  appears  never  to 
have  been  applied  before  1641  to  those  English  people  who 
espoused  the  cause  of  Anabaptism,  and  accordingly  the  name 
by  which  they  were  known  to  the  public  during  this  period  has 
here  been  employed.  The  same  rule  has  generally  been  observed 
with  regard  to  Brownists,  Barrowists,  and  Puritans,  all  of  whom 
disliked  the  popular  names  given  to  them. 

7.  The  difference  in  meaning  between  "Anabaptist"  and 
"  Catabaptist "  is  clearly  given,  in  confirmation  of  Dr  George  A. 
Lofton's  view  expressed  at  the  time  of  the  so-called  Whitsitt 


Introduction  27 

controversy,  that  the  prefixes  in  these  words  give  no  indication 
whatever  of  the  mode  of  baptism  practised  by  those  to  whom 
these  names  were  respectively  given. 

8.  The  book  entitled  The  summe  of  the  holye  scrypture / and 
ordynary  of  the  Christen  teachyngjihe  true  Chrystenfaythe/.S'^, 
published  in  1529  or  1530,  and  at  least  three  or  four  times 
reprinted,  is  here  plainly  shown  not  to  be  the  translation  of  an 
Anabaptist  work,  as  it  has  sometimes  been  mistakenly  repre- 
sented. 

9.  Several  scarce  early  English  translations  of  Continental 
books  against  the  Anabaptists  are  here  named,  and  their  influ- 
ence as  a  means  of  disseminating  a  knowledge  of  Anabaptist 
views,  rather  than  the  actual  presence  in  England  of  English 
Anabaptists  and  Anabaptist  books,  is  suggested. 

10.  The  beginnings  of  later  English  separatism  are  not 
to  be  found  in  the  migration  of  Continental  Anabaptists  to 
England,  but  rather  in  the  congregations  of  Marian  exiles  on 
the  Continent,  or  in  the  congregations  which  met  together  in 
London  and  elsewhere  in  England  during  Queen  Mary's  reign 
and  later. 

11.  Richard  Woodman,  Anne  Askewe,  and  William  Tyndall, 
who  have  been  claimed  as  Baptists,  or  possible  Baptists,  by  over- 
zealous  historians,  are  clearly  proved  not  to  have  been  such. 

12.  Evidence  is  given  whereby  we  may  know  that  Robert 
Cooche  was  not  a  member  of  an  Anabaptist  congregation  about 
1550  or  1551. 

13.  The  views  of  Edward  Wightman,  the  early  Legatine- 
Arian  or  Seeker,  are  somewhat  fully  given  from  the  record  of  his 
trial  on  November  19-December  5, 1611, — a  trial  record  as  yet 
almost  unnoticed  in  England.  That  he  was  not  an  Anabaptist 
or  Baptist,  as  has  sometimes  been  represented,  is  made  perfectly 
evident. 

14.  The  views  of  William  Sayer,  are  here,  it  is  believed, 
first  made  known  from  a  MS.  of  the  date  1612.  A  letter  of 
Archbishop  Abbot  relating  to  Sayer  is  also  here  given. 


28  Early  English  Dissenters 

15.  Good  texts  of  various  documents  relative  to  the 
congregation  of  Richard  Fitz  are  given  in  full,  some  of  the 
mistakes  of  previous  writers  concerning  this  congregation  are 
rectified,  and  the  reason  is  stated  why  it  cannot  truly  be 
considered  the  "first  regularly  constituted  English  Congre- 
gational Church  of  which  any  record  or  tradition  remains",  as 
claimed  by  Dr  R.  W.  Dale.  The  history  of  Fitz's  church  is 
given  in  detail. 

16.  Robert  Browne,  at  an  early  stage  of  his  career,  may  be 
truly  called  a  pioneer  of  what  to-day  is  known  as  Congrega- 
tionalism, but  a  long  period  of  evolution  intervenes  between 
him  and  present-day  Congregationalists  and  Independents.  His 
connection  with  the  first  Independents  (or  first  Congrega- 
tionalists) is  likewise  rather  indirect.  It  is  probable  that 
Browne  was  never  quite  so  rigid  a  separatist  as  he  has  some- 
times been  made  to  appear.  For  instance,  he  does  not  seem  to 
have  regarded  the  Church  of  England  as  a  false  Church,  but 
only  as  an  imperfect  one.  Barrowe  and  Greenwood,  on  the 
other  hand,  were  strict  separatists,  and  as  they  were  popularly 
nicknamed  "  Brownists  "  (though,  as  they  themselves  claimed, 
utterly  without  foundation),  their  ideas  concerning  strict 
separatism  seem  to  have  been  referred  back  to  Browne,  thus 
possibly  making  him  in  his  earlier  years  appear  to  some  of  his 
contemporaries  as  a  man  of  narrower  spirit  than  he  really  was. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  disclaimed  (and 
as  the  writer  believes,  honestly)  all  connection  with  Browne. 
The  Barrowists  derived  their  ideas  chiefly  fi-om  Cartwright  and 
his  followers,  as  they  asserted,  and  there  now  seems  to  be  no 
jeason  for  doubting  their  word.  The  author  has  specially  sought 
to  determine  Browne's  true  place  in  the  history  of  his  time,  and 
to  give  expression  to  a  new  interpretation  of  "  A  Booke  which 
sheweth",  which  may  aid  us  to  a  better  understanding  of  his 
illusive  hopes  and  ambitions.  The  theory  is  also  expressed 
that  he  practised  a  certain  type  of  Congregationalism  during 
all  the  years  spent  at  Achurch. 

17.  Some  new  light  is  probably  thrown  on  the  wife-beating 
episodes  in  Browne's  life. 


Introditction  29 

18.  The  "ancient"  Barrowist  church  of  Barrowe,  Green- 
wood, and  Johnson,  is  described  from  the  primary  sources,  viz., 
the  original  Puckering  MSS.  from  which  the  much  used  Baker 
transcripts  in  Harleian  MS.  7042  were  made.  The  results  of 
recent  researches  relating  to  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  are  also 
discussed. 

19.  Two  of  the  most  extended  and  interesting  manuscripts 
of  John  Penry  apparently  still  extant  are  given  in  full  in  the 
volume  of  documents.  One  of  these  is  an  anonymous  writing  of 
his,  which  seems  hitherto  to  have  been  unnoticed  by  modern 
historians,  entitled  A  short  and  true  Answer,  etc.,  and  the  other 
is  what  in  brief  may  be  termed  his  Confession  of  Faith  and 
his  Apology,  the  location  of  which,  though  discovered  by 
Dr  John  Waddington\  has  remained  up  to  this  time  gene- 
rally unknown.  From  these  two  documents  we  learn  much 
more  intimately  what  Penry's  true  views  were,  and  that 
among  his  papers  was  "  a  diarie  or  daily  obseruacion  of  rayne 
[his]  owne  S5Tmes",  etc.,  which  was  intercepted  and  the 
entirely  private  contents  of  which,  he  feared,  were  to  be  used 
unjustly  to  assist  in  his  conviction.  Some  interesting  points  in 
Penry's  life  are  contained  in  the  various  Penry  papers  here 
presented. 

20.  Several  varying  texts  are  given  of  the  covenant  of  the 
Barrowe  and  Greenwood  congregation  before  its  organization  in 
September,  1592. 

21.  Some  new  light  is  thrown  on  Johnson's  conversion  to 
Barrowism. 

22.  Practically  all  the  earliest  Brownist  and  Barrowist 
leaders  before  they  died  made  statements  somewhat  resembling 
"  retractations ",  and  Barrowe  at  the  end,  as  indicated  by  his 
last  words,  seems  to  have  wondered  if  he  had  been  deceived  in 
what  he  had  taught  his  followers. 

1  Dr  Waddington  cited  this  work  in  part  in  his  John  Penryy  1854,  but 
does  not  tell  where  the  manuscript  was  to  be  found. 


30  Early  English  Dissenters 

23.  Sir  Walter  Raleigh's  estimate  of  the  number  of 
Brownists  as  being  20,000  about  1593  is,  upon  good  grounds, 
seriously  questioned  and  rejected. 

24.  Certain  evidence  relating  to  Henry  Ainsworth's  early 
life  (hitherto  questioned  by  Congregational  historians)  is  here 
admitted  as  trustworthy,  while  the  true  story  of  his  death,  it  is 
believed,  is  told  from  the  earliest  published  source.  The  exact 
title  is  also  given  of  the  first  edition  of  Ainsworth's  A  Censvre 
upon  a  Dialogve  of  the  Anabaptists,  1623,  the  existence  of  a 
copy  of  which  has  hitherto  been  unnoted  by  historians. 

25.  A  list  has  been  collected  from  George  Johnson's  "  dis- 
course "  of  the  names  of  more  than  sixty  persons  who  had  been 
members  of  Francis  Johnson's  congregation  before  1603. 

26.  Evidence  is  given  that  Giles  Thorpe,  contrary  to 
Dr  Dexter,  never  printed  a  book  with  the  title,  The  Hunting 
of  the  Fox,  Part  I,  and  therefore  obviously  not  in  1616,  as  he 
suggests. 

27.  The  later  history  of  the  Ainsworth  church  is  more  fully 
told  than  hitherto. 

28.  The  little  known  experiences  of  Sabine  Staresmore  are 
given  in  detail. 

29.  The  story  of  John  Canne  in  Amsterdam  has  been 
somewhat  elucidated. 

30.  Stephen  Offwood's  position  in  Amsterdam  has  been 
made  more  clear. 

31.  An  extended  account  is  given  of  the  congregation  of 
London  Barrowists  after  the  departure  of  most  of  the  members 
for  Holland  in  1593. 

32.  An  attempt  is  made  more  definitely  to  locate  the 
early  Barrowist  church  "  in  the  West  of  England  ". 

33.  The  story  of  the  Norwich  Brownist  (Barrowist)  church 
from  1590  to  1603  is  given  with  more  fullness  of  detail  than 
has  been  customary. 


Introduction  31 

34.  The  problem  as  to  the  identity  of  the  pastor  of  the 
congregation  at  Norwich  has  been  successfully  solved. 

35.  New  points  of  interest  are  given  with  regard  to  William 
Euring  and  the  Brownists  of  Great  Yarmouth,  and  it  is  pointed 
out  that  the  Brownist  and  the  Independent  (Puritan)  congrega- 
tions of  that  city  had  no  connection  whatever  with  each  other. 

36.  The  differences  between  the  opinions  of  John  Wilkinson 
and  of  other  Brownists  and  Barrowists  are  carefully  indicated, 
and  mention  is  made  of  Wilkinson's  dispute  with  John  Murton 
in  1613,  while  both  were  in  prison. 

37.  A  new  theory  relating  to  the  connection  of  Henoch 
Clapham  with  the  Barrowists  is  here  advanced,  and  an  extended 
account  is  given  of  his  strange  career. 

38.  Some  notes  of  interest  are  given  concerning  the  early 
unsettled,  wandering  Brownists  (Barrowists)  who  had  deserted 
the  orthodox  Barrowists. 

39.  Various  uncommon  facts  concerning  the  Family  of  Love 
are  mentioned,  and  attention  is  first  called  to  the  only  known 
manuscript  copy  in  English  of  the  Psalmes  &  Songes  brought 

forth  through  H.N.,  apparently  translated  as  a  Hymn  Book  for 
the  English  Family  of  Love. 

40.  The  origin  and  views  of  the  English  Seekers  (termed 
Legatine-Arians  or  the  Scattered  Flock  before  1641)  are  given 
with  some  detail. 

41.  The  first  company  of  English  Anabaptists  of  which  we 
have  definite  information  is  here  discovered  not  to  be  that  of 
John  Smyth,  as  has  usually  been  supposed  in  recent  years.  A 
brief  account  of  this  first  congregation  is  here  presented. 

42.  Four  copies  are  located  of  John  Smith's  (Smyth's) 
A  Paterne  of  Trve  Prayer,  of  which  Mr  Arber  says  {The  Story 
of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  1897,  p.  133),  "  Every  copy  of  this  first 
edition  of  1605  has  apparently  disappeared". 

43.  The  writer  has  discovered  that  John  Smyth,  in  his 
character  of  Se-Baptist,  is  not  so  unique  as  has  hitherto  been 


32  Early  English  Dissenters 

supposed.     He  was  neither  the  only,  nor  even  the  first,  English 
Se-Baptist. 

44.  Attention  is  called  to  an  hitherto  unnoticed  letter  of 
Thomas  Helwys  (Ellwes'),  written  on  September  26,  1608, 
which  describes  the  differences  between  John  Smyth's  con- 
gregation and  that  of  Francis  Johnson  at  Amsterdam.  The 
letter  proves  that  by  September  26, 1608,  Smyth's  congregation 
was  already  in  Amsterdam,  and  indicates  that  it  had  probably 
been  there  some  little  time.  The  letter  further  suggests  that 
Smyth's  congregation  at  first  looked  upon  Johnson's  followers 
as  brethren,  but  gives  no  indication  that  Smyth's  party  ever 
joined  Johnson's  church. 

45.  Attention  is  also  called  to  the  fact  that  Smyth's  con- 
gregation broke  up  into  three,  not  into  two,  divisions.  With 
the  third  division  Leonard  Busher  may  have  associated  himself. 

46.  Texts  of  a  considerable  number  of  important  Dutch, 
Latin,  and  English  MSS.  pertaining  to  the  earliest  English 
Anabaptists  are  given  in  full.  This  is  presumably  the  first 
time  the  original  texts  of  most  of  these  documents  have  been 
published  in  England. 

47.  This  work  also  contains  certain  points,  for  the  first 
time  noted,  concerning  the  printed  English  edition  of  the  one 
hundred  article  confession  of  faith  published  by  the  remainder 
of  John  Smyth's  congregation. 

48.  The  discovery  that  Benjamin  Stinton  and  Thomas 
Crosby  made  an  error  in  fostering  the  belief  that  Thomas 
Helwys  lived  after  May  10,  1622,  enables  the  writer  to  prove 
beyond  doubt  that  Helwys  died  before  1616. 

49.  A  solution  is  suggested  to  the  problem  relating  to  the 
original  edition  of  John  Murton's  Truth's  Champion. 

50.  The  exact  title  and  probable  date  of  the  exceedingly 
scarce  pamphlet,  A  very  plain  and  well  grounded  Treatise  con- 
cerning Baptisme,  are  made  known.  Dr  Dexter  apparently 
knew  of  no  copy  of  this  pamphlet, 

>  Elwes. 


Introduction  33 

51.  The  problem  of  the  letter  signed  "  H.  H,",  heretofore 
usually  ascribed  to  Thomas  Helvvys,  is  solved,  and  the  probable 
meaning  of  its  signature  suggested. 

52.  The  fiill  title  is  given  of  The  Patrimony  of  Christian 
Children,  London,  1624,  4°.  This  was  written  by  Robert  Cleaver, 
"  with  the  ioynt  consent  of  Mr.  lohn  Dod  ".  Dr  Dexter  seems 
to  have  known  of  no  copy  of  this  work. 

53.  Information  is  given  concerning  an  hitherto  apparently 
unknown  Baptist  minister  at  Tiverton  in  1631,  James  Toppe, 
and  also  concerning  an  unnoticed  MS.  of  his  bearing  the  title, 
CHRIST S  MONARCH L\call,  and  personall  Reigne  vppon 
Earth:  over  \  all  the  Kingdoms  of  this  world,...  |  ..,  written 
in  controversy  against  Leonard  Busher. 

54.  Various  new  points  concerning  Leonard  Busher  are 
offered  for  the  first  time*'. 

55.  A  fresh  chapter  in  the  history  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land has  been  prepared,  giving  some  account  of  the  English 
(Puritan)  congregations  on  the  Continent  between  1579  and 
1641.  This  description  has  been  drawn  from  the  hitherto  little- 
noticed  first  volume  of  Boswell  Papers. 

56.  The  beginnings  of  Independency  or  Congregationalism, 
are  not,  as  heretofore,  traced  to  the  Brownists  or  Barrowists, 
but  to  the  Congregational  Puritanism  advocated  by  Henry 
Jacob  and  William  Bradshaw  about  1604  and  1605,  and  later 
put  in  practice  by  various  Puritan  congregations  on  the 
Continent,  whence  it  was  brought  to  America  and  back  into 
England.  Puritan  Congregationalism  accordingly  did  not  have 
its  source  in  separatism,  nor  was  it  separatist  in  spirit,  but  was 
constantly  declared  by  its  upholders  as  involving  a  separation 
only  from  the  world,  and  not  from  the  Church  of  England. 

1  I  seem  to  have  been  followed  in  my  researches  in  Holland  by  Dr  W. 
T.  Whitley,  who  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Baptist  HistoHcal  Society  for 
April  1909  (pp.  107-113)  has  published  an  article  entitled  "Leonard 
Bnsher,  Dutchman  ",  giving  an  English  trftn^lfttjon  of  a  document  upon 
which  I  base  some  of  my  infonnation, 

B.  3 


34  Early  English  Dissenters 

57.  Through  the  agency  of  the  Congregational  Puritans, 
and  especially  Henry  Jacob,  John  Robinson  was  won  back  from 
the  ways  of  separatism  before  1616  (certainly  before  1618), 
while  Jacob  instead  of  being  influenced  by  Robinson  towards 
separatism  according  to  tradition,  can  be  readily  shown  never  to 
have  been  a  separatist  from  the  Church  of  England. 

58.  The  value  of  the  Gould  MS.  is  rediscussed,  the  im- 
portant parts  relating  to  our  subject  are  given  in  full,  and 
a  reconstruction  of  these  documents  is  undertaken,  in  so  far  as 
is  necessary  and  possible,  by  the  use  of  the  best  known  historical 
data. 

59.  The  solution  of  the  problem  concerning  the  Brownist- 
Anabaptist,  Samuel  Eaton,  is  given. 

60.  It  is  shown  that  the  majority  of  the  Puritan  churches 
of  New  England  did  not  even  know  what  the  church  polity  of 
the  Plymouth  Congregation  was,  and  hence  did  not  derive  their 
views  from  the  congregation  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers.  It  is  also 
pointed  out  that  while  the  Plymouth  church  may  at  first  have 
differed  slightly  from  more  professed  followers  of  Henry  Jacob, 
i.e.  the  Independent  Puritans,  it  was,  nevertheless,  well  leavened 
with  "  Jacobite  "  doctrine  and  seems  ultimately  to  have  become 
quite  like  the  neighbouring  Independent  Puritan  congregations. 
Hence  American  Congregationalism,  as  well  as  that  in  England, 
is  to  be  traced  back  directly  neither  to  Browne  nor  to  Barrowe, 
but  to  the  Independent  or  Congregational  Puritanism  of  the 
Continent.  American  Congregational  churches,  then,  did  not 
originally  separate  from  the  Church  of  England,  but  have  be- 
come separatist  and  as  they  are  to-day  in  other  respects,  only 
by  a  gradual  and  almost  unnoticed  process  of  evolution. 

61.  A  clear  line  of  distinction  is  drawn  throughout  between 
separatists  of  whatever  name  and  the  Puritans.  The  separatists 
were  not  Puritans  in  the  original  sense  of  the  word,  and  until 
this  distinction  is  recognized,  it  will  be  practically  impossible 
satisfactorily  to  explain  certain  phenomena  to  be  found  in  early 
Dissenting  history. 


Introduction  35 

62.  It  is  shown  that  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  two 
earliest  American  immersionist  Baptist  churches  at  Newport 
and  Providence,  R.I.,  contrary  to  tradition,  cannot  have  existed 
as  such  before  1647.  It  is  also  suggested  that  under  these 
circumstances  it  looks  as  though  the  Newport  church  is  slightly 
the  older  of  the  two,  having  apparently  begun  to  practise 
immersion  about  1648.  The  Providence  church  seems  to  have 
derived  its  baptism  by  dipping  or  immersion  from  the  church  in 
Newport  in  1648  or  1649. 

63.  Attention  is  called  to  considerable  new  material  relating 
to  the  early  use  of  church  covenants. 

64.  The  fluctuations  in  the  progress  of  English  Dissent, 
as  well  as  the  unsettled  state  of  dissenting  ideals  during  this 
period,  are  noted. 


3—2 


I  know  Machiavel  was  wont  to  say,  That  he  who  undertakes  to  write  a 
History^  must  he  of  no  Religion:.,. 

But,  I  believe,  his  meaning  was  much  better  than  his  words,  intending 
therein,  That  a  Writer  of  Histories  must  not  discover  his  inclination  in 
Religion  to  the  prejudice  of  Truth:... 

This  I  have  endeavoured  to  my  utmost  in  this  Book ;  knowing  as  that 
Oyle  is  adjudged  the  best  that  hath  no  tast  at  all;  so  that  Historian  is  pre- 
ferred, who  hath  the  lea^t  Tangue  oi  partial  Reflections. 

(Thomas  Fuller's  "Church  History  of  Britain",  London,  1655, 
■-"The  Epistle  Dedicatory"  of  the  Tenth  Book.) 


FOREWORD 


Before  entering  upon  the  discussion  of  our  subject  it  will 
be  of  advantage  to  define  certain  terms,  the  altered  meaning  of 
which  after  the  lapse  of  three  centuries  requires  a  clear  state- 
ment of  their  original  signification.  To-day  the  words  Non- 
conformist, Dissenter,  Independent,  Congregationalist,  Baptist, 
are  all  applied  in  popular  usage  to  separatists  fi-om  the  Church 
of  England.  It  may  not  be  generally  known  that  all  these 
words  have  not  always  been  so  employed.  The  earliest  Non- 
conformists, for  instance,  were  not  separatists,  but  often  learned 
clergjTiien  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  found  fault  ^vith  the 
clerical  vestments,  etc.,  and  yet  remained  in  the  Church.  The 
term  Puritan  appears  to  have  been  first  used  about  1566,  and 
was  correctly  applied  to  Nonconformists  as  previously  defined. 
The  word  Dissenter  appears  to  have  had  a  history  similar  to 
that  of  the  word  Nonconformist,  only  it  seems  to  have  been 
first  employed  after  1641.  The  terms  Independent  and  Con- 
gregationalist have  now  come  popularly  to  signify  separatists, 
but  as  first  used  they,  also,  evidently  were  applied  to  non- 
separatist  Puritans,  who,  unlike  those  whom  we  may  designate 
the  elder  Presbyterian  Puritans,  maintained  that  each  congre- 
gation had  the  right  to  control  its  own  afiairs  without  inter- 
ference from  Classes  and  Synods,  as  well  as  from  Archbishops 
and  Bishops.  The  words  Anabaptist  (later  Baptist),  Brownist, 
Barrowist,  on  the  other  hand,  have  always  been  properly  applied 
to  separatists.  With  these  distinctions  fresh  in  mind  we  may 
turn  to  the  discussion  of  our  subject. 

The  years  1549-1641  were  in  every  way  momentous  in  the 
history  of  the  English  nation.     Europe  at  that  time  was  more 


38  Early  English  Dissenters 

or  less  in  a  state  of  upheaval.  The  first  storms  of  the  Re- 
formation had  left  behind  a  long  trail  of  unsettled  conditions 
and  bitter  conflict.  Nations  that  had  long  slept  were  beginning 
to  awaken.  The  eventful  but  uncertain  years  of  Henry  VIII's 
reign  were  happily  over,  and  the  still  more  unsettled  rule  of 
Edward  VI  was  coming  to  a  close.  The  period  that  now  began 
was  one  of  great  suspense,  but  was  followed  by  another  of  un- 
usual productiveness  in  letters  and  commerce,  and  ultimately  in 
the  development  of  English  religious  thought. 

The  English  monarchs  of  this  period  were  five  in  number, — 
Edward  VI,  Mary,  Elizabeth,  James  I,  and  Charles  I.  Throughout 
this  succession  of  years  the  personal  views  of  the  rulers  had  a 
powerful  influence  on  general  religious  opinions  and  indirectly 
on  the  development  of  separatism.  The  Privy  Council,  also,  in 
that  day  not  only  enjoyed  the  right  of  interfering  in  matters 
religious,  but  used  it  sometimes  with  good,  sometimes  with  bad 
effect.  Under  Elizabeth  new  and  unusually  grave  problems 
had  to  be  faced.  It  seemed  highly  dangerous  to  allow  any 
great  diversity  of  religious  views,  especially  as  Rome  might 
then  again  secure  the  mastery  over  the  country.  Accordingly, 
in  suppressing  the  Roman  Catholics  the  government  felt  it 
equally  necessary  to  restrain  all  kinds  of  nonconformity  and  to 
demand  uniformity  in  Church  worship.  The  first  task  of 
Elizabeth  was  to  unify  the  State,  and  in  her  opinion  the 
quickest  way  to  accomplish  that  end  seemed  to  be  to  crush 
out  all  views  inimical  to  the  State  religion.  The  Privy  Council 
evidently  determined  to  carry  out  this  plan,  and  sometimes  was 
probably  even  more  truly  responsible  for  persecution  than  the 
bishops,  for  more  than  once  the  Council  must  have  iustructed 
the  bishops  to  do  things  which  they  might  not  otherwise  have 
attempted.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Council  occasionally  curbed 
the  spirits  of  too  aggressive  prelates. 

This  condition  of  affairs  should  be  kept  in  mind  when  one 
speaks  of  the  cruelty  of  the  bishops  of  Elizabeth's  reign.  Some 
of  them  certainly  were  cruel  at  times,  but  even  then  they  may 
have  been  inflamed  to  deeds  of  cruelty  by  order  of  the  Privy 
Council,  or  by  truly  conscientious  views.  These  possibilities 
are  brought  to  mind  because  some  of  the  bishops  and  arch- 


Foreword  39 

bishops  have  not  always  been  dealt  with  any  too  charitably  by 
modem  Nonconformist  historians.  On  the  other  hand  Arch- 
bishop Abbot,  who  has  been  more  favourably  regarded  because 
he  was  not  so  rigorous  against  the  Puritans,  appears  to  have 
been  fairly  eager  in  the  pursuit  of  heresy.  The  fault  evidently  lay 
partly  in  a  system  in  which  religion  was  so  ruled  by  politics  that 
even  an  archbishop  could  not  always  do  as  he  himself  thought 
best,  but  must  follow  the  dictates  of  politicians.  Dr  Powicke 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  Congregationalist  to  attempt  to  do 
the  bishops  of  Henry  Barrowe's  time  any  degree  of  justice. 
Nor  is  this  strange,  for  the  contemporary  reports  of  those  who 
suffered  are  likely  to  make  one  think  of  some  of  the  high 
Ecclesiastical  dignitaries  of  that  period  as  cruel  and  unreason- 
able men,  but  when  allowance  is  made  for  the  time  in  which 
they  lived  and  the  difficulties  with  which  they  had  to  con- 
tend, it  appears  that  a  more  lenient  view  may  sometimes  be 
taken. 

During  the  latter  part  of  Elizabeth's  reign  the  condition  of 
the  separatists  improved,  for  none  were  put  to  death  after  the 
execution  of  Barrowe,  Greenwood  and  Penry,  and  the  remaining 
Barrowists  were  allowed  to  go  into  exile  in  foreign  parts  where 
they  might  live  in  peace.  On  the  accession  of  James  I  con- 
ditions for  a  further  reformation  in  the  Church  of  England 
according  to  Puritan  ideals  appeared  favourable,  but  the  King 
had  not  been  long  on  the  throne  before  it  became  evident  that 
he  had  no  real  sympathy  with  Puritanism  and  would  be  no 
tolerator  of  separatism.  In  the  work  of  repressing  Puritans 
and  separatists  an  able  instrument  was  found  in  the  person  of 
Richard  Bancroft,  who  was  raised  from  the  position  of  Bishop 
of  London  to  that  of  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  He,  however, 
did  not  live  many  years  and  was  succeeded  by  George  Abbot, 
during  whose  primacy  the  cause  of  separatism  certainly  made 
some,  though  slow,  headway. 

On  Feb.  2,  1626,  Charles  I  became  King,  and  in  Sept.,  1633, 
on  the  death  of  Archbishop  Abbot,  Dr  William  Laud  was  pro- 
moted to  the  primacy.  With  high  hand  Laud  now  began  to 
overthrow  whatever  seemed  to  him  to  interfere  with  the  pros- 
perity of  the  Church  of  England.     His  manner  of  dealing  with 


40  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  Church  of  Scotland,  as  well  as  with  Puritanism  in  England, 
however,  eventually  brought  about  his  own  downfall,  and  helped 
to  dethrone  his  royal  master.  By  this  very  work  of  repression 
the  victory  was  temporarily  secured  for  the  cause  he  had  sought 
to  injure,  and  one  may  justly  suspect  that  to  him,  and  to  some 
other  bishops  and  archbishops  who  have  held  similar  views,  has 
also  been  due  much  of  the  continued  development  and  success 
of  English  Dissent. 


CHAPTER  I 

THE  ANABAPTISTS   IN  ENGLAND  BEFORE   1612 

So  far  as  can  now  be  ascertained,  a  tendency  towards 
separatism  first  made  its  appearance  in  England  about  1550. 
Probably  there  was  no  uniformly  continuous  development  of 
separatist  views  in  the  ensuing  century.  At  times  separation 
may  even  have  been  almost  entirely  crushed  out,  but  it  kept 
coming  to  life  again  in  one  form  or  another,  and  finally  attained 
surprising  growth  in  the  period  of  the  Commonwealth.  Before 
and  even  during  that  time  separatism  must  be  regarded  as  in 
process  of  evolution.  Into  the  final  product  were  woven  many 
elements,  the  combined  contribution  of  Anabaptists,  Puritans, 
the  Family  of  Love,  the  English  Seekers,  Brownists,  Barrowists, 
Franciscans  or  Johnsonians,  Ainsworthians,  Independents,  and 
still  other  gi'oups  of  later  English  reformers. 

Before  1550,  as  the  Calendars  of  State  Papers  plainly  record, 
a  few  isolated  Anabaptists  had  been  found  in  England,  but 
they  seem  to  have  been  chiefly,  or  only^  foreigners,  and  these 
were  soon  banished  from  the  country  or  burned  to  death. 
Furthermore,  the  word  Anabaptist  even  in  these  early  times 
was  evidently  employed  as  a  generic  term  to  designate  separatists, 
or  indeed  any  persons  of  irregular  or  fanatical  religious  opinions. 
For  this  reason  many  mistakes  concerning  the  early  Anabaptists 
have  been  made. 

>  I  am  not  yet  certain,  for  instance,  as  to  whether  such  Anabaptists  of 
1549,  as  "Michaele  Thombe  of  London  bocher"  and  "Johanna  Bocher", 
otherwise  known  as  Joan  of  Kent,  mentioned  in  Da  vide  Wilkins'  "Con- 
cilia Magnae  Britanniae",  London,  1737,  Vol.  iv.,  pp.  42-44,  were  born 
in  England  or  not.  Their  views  were  certainly  of  the  Continental 
Melchiorite  or  Hofmannite  type. 


42  Early  English  Dissenters 

Before  1550,  too,  it  appears  that  no  Anabaptist  books  were 
printed  in  England,  either  in  English  or  in  any  other  language, 
and  no  English  translations  of  the  works  of  Continental 
Anabaptists  are  known  to  have  been  published  before  the  time 
of  the  Civil  Wars.  This  may  come  as  a  surprise  and  disappoint- 
ment to  those  who  have  hitherto  supposed  that  the  work, 
reported  to  have  been  translated  by  Simon  Fish  into  English, 
entitled,  "  The  sum*  |  me  of  the  holye  |  scrypture  /  &  ordynary  | 
of  the  Christen  teachyng/  |  the  true  Chrysten  faythe"/  |  ..., 
8°,  [fol.  iv,  xciii,  1529  or  1530],  was  an  Anabaptist  work\ 

It  must  first  be  admitted  that  some  parts  of  the  book 
relating  to  baptism,  if  taken  without  their  context,  might  cause 
an  uncritical  reader  to  believe  that  the  author  of  such  passages 
must  have  been  an  Anabaptist,  but  if  we  make  allowance  for 
the  interval  of  nearly  four  hundred  years  between  the  time  of 
writing  and  our  day,  and  observe  how  men  at  that  period 
commonly  expressed  themselves  on  the  subject  of  baptism,  and 
if  we  then  carefully  examine  other  passages  in  the  book  of  an 
evidently  different  tenor,  we  cannot  help  coming  to  the  contrary 
conclusion  that  this  work,  in  spite  of  its  reputation  among 
Baptists,  was  not  written  by  an  Anabaptist,  If,  further,  we 
examine  the  contemporary  opinion  of  the  book  as  expressed 
by  those  who  condemned  it,  it  will  be  perfectly  clear  that  its 
contents  were  not  prohibited  because  it  contained  any  taint 
of  Anabaptism. 

^  Apparently  there  are  only  two  copies  of  the  first  English  edition  of 
this  work  in  existence,  neither  of  them  quite  complete.  The  copy  in  the 
British  Museum  [Press-mark  C.  37.  a.  28  (2)]  lacks  the  title-page,  and  the 
copy  in  the  Cambridge  University  Library  [Press-mark  Syn.  8.  53.  9^]  is 
slightly  imperfect  in  the  middle  and  at  the  end.  From  the  two,  one 
perfect  copy  might  be  made,  the  writer  has  good  reason  to  believe,  although 
it  has  hitherto  been  supposed  that  these  copies  were  of  different  editions. 
There  now  seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  both  copies  are  of  the  same  edition. 
Several  other  slightly  later  editions  in  English  may  be  found  in  the 
previously  mentioned  libraries.  The  book  was  apparently  first  published 
at  Basle  in  1523  and  bore  the  title,  "€[  La  Summe  de  lescripture  |  saincte 
/  et  lordinaire  des  Chresties  /  |  enseignant  la  vraye  foy  Chre;|stienne:..." 
A  copy  of  this  edition  may  be  found  in  the  British  Museum  [Press-mark 
C.  57.  a.  20].  The  work  was  translated  into  Dutch,  whence,  it  is  supposed, 
it  was  translated  into  English. 


The  Anabaptists  in  Englaiid  before  1612     43 

In  order  to  convince  the  reader  of  the  truth  of  this  assertion 
all  the  necessary  citations,  favourable  and  unfavourable,  may 
be  given,  and  the  true  gist  of  the  author's  statements  carefully 
extracted.  In  the  first  place,  he  was  certainly  not  an  ordinary 
Anabaptist,  since  he  believed  in  original  sin,  a  view  not  generally 
held  by  Anabaptists,  He  says  on  this  point\  "  For  we  be  therby 
borne  agayn  /  and  they  that  were  the  chyldren  of  the  deuell  by 
cause  of  the  originall  synne  ar  made  the  chyldren  of  God  by 
baptesme  ".  Yet  though  he  does  not  believe  in  original  sin,  he 
says*,  "  Nether  hath  the  water  of  the  fountaine  more  vertue  in 
hit  sylfe  then  the  water  that  rynneth  in  the  ryuer  of  Ryne 
[Rhine].  For  we  maye  aswell  baptyse  in  Ryne  /  as  in  the  fount", 
and  he  gives  the  following  description  of  baptism',  which  on  the 
face  of  it,  one  must  admit,  looks  decidedly  as  though  the  author 
was  an  Anabaptist : — 

Then  when  we  be  baptysed  /  we  betoken  that  we  wyll  dye  wytli 
Chryst  /  we  betoken  I  say  /  that  we  wyll  dye  as  vnto  the  lyfe 
passed  as  touchyng  cure  syiines  and  euyll  concupiscences,  and  that  / 
as  sayeth.  S.  Paul  /  we  must  walke  in  a  newe  lyfe,  And  therfore 
be  we  plonged  vnder  the  water,  to  thintent  that  by  the  maner  of 
spekinge  /  we  sbuld  be  here  deed  [sic\  and  buryed,  as  wryteth  sainte 
Paule  vnto  the  Romayns  Bretheren  /  saythe  he  /  Esteme  ye  that  ye 
are  deed  as  concernynge  synne  but  a  lyue  vnto  god,  by  lesu  Christ 
our  lord.  And  in  the  same  place,  Ye  are  buryed  wyth  Christ  by 
baptesme  into  deth...*. 

That  the  author,  however,  is  not  speaking  of  adult,  or 
believers',  baptism,  but  of  that  of  infants,  and  yet  in  such  terms 
as  Baptists  of  to-day  suppose  they  themselves  alone  use,  is  seen 
in  the  following  statement  ^  "  And  this  haue  we  not  gotten  by 
our  good  works  for  we  haue  yet  don  no  good,  when  we  were 
baptysed  ". 

Among  the  passages  most  interesting  in  this  discussion  are 
the  following*: — 

1  Fol.  ii,  recto,  of  the  first  edition  in  English,  1529  or  1530. 

^  Fol.  i,  verso.  3  Yo\.  ii,  verso. 

*  With  a  few  exceptions  the  abbreviations  occurring  in  the  citations 
(though  not  in  the  titles  of  books  or  MSS.)  throughout  this  volume  have 
been  extended  without  any  special  indication. 

^  Fol.  iiii,  recto.  ^  Fol.  v,  recto. 


44  Eai'iy  English  Dissenters 

And  this  is  the  grace  the  whych  comyth  to  vs  and  is  gyuen  at  the 
fount  of  baptesme. 

But  to  thintent  that  we  shulde  not  be  vnkynde  /  therfore  for 
this  grace  we  do  bynde  our  selues  again  [at  Confirmation  ?]  and  yelde 
vs  vnto  hym,  promysynge  that  we  wyll  serue  hym  /  and  denye  the 
deuyll  /  and  all  his  temptacyon  /  pompe,  and  counsell  /  and  that  we 
wyll  serue  Christ  crucifyed  for  vs  /  and  vpon  this  promyse  receyue 
we  our  name  /  and  god  hath  wryten  vs  as  in  a  rolle  for  his  Cham- 
pyons  and  seruauntes  /  and  so  be  we  made  propre  to  god. 

This,  if  only  casually  examined,  might  not  seem  to  refer 

to  infants,  and  the  following  citation  also  at  first  sight  appears 

to   make   certain    the   view   that    this   work    is    that    of   an 

Anabaptist^ : — 

Beholde  nowe  thou  seest  well  what  thinge  the  baptesme  be- 
tokeneth  /  &  it  is  all  one  before  god  yf  thou  be  .Ixxx.  yere  olde  /  or 
twenty  yere  olde  when  thou  receauest  the  baptesme,  for  god  regardeth 
not  howe  olde  thou  art  /  but  wyth  what  purpose  and  entencyon  / 
and  with  what  faythe  thou  receauest  this  baptesme  and  grace.  He 
regardeth  not  whether  thou  be  lue  or  paynyme  /  man  or  woman  / 
noble  or  vnnoble  /  byshop  or  cytezyn. 

The  following  paragraphs,  however,  clearly  indicate  that  the 
author  is  not  an  Anabaptist  in  spite  of  all  that  he  has  previously 
said  which  might  suggest  the  contrary.  Here  the  meaning  is 
direct  and  clear^: — 

And  we  be  moche  more  bound  vnto  our  promyse  made  at  the 
baptesme,  then  any  religyous  vnto  his  professyon.  For  we  make  no 
promyse  vnto  man,  but  vnto  god,  and  we  promyse  not  to  kepe  the 
rule  of  a  man  but  of  the  gospell,  Thinke  ye  not  therfore  that  it  is  a 
small  thynge  to  be  a  Christen  /  when  thou  hast  promysed  to  lesu 
Christ  to  amende  thy  lyfe  /  &  that  thou  wilt  not  lyue  accordyng  to 
the  world  /  nor  accordyng  to  the  fleshe.  It  is  a  greate  thyng  to 
enterprise  the  christen  faith,  which  so  fewe  people  do  knowe  what 
thing  it  conteyneth  /  namely  suche  as  here  after  the  world  do  serue 
to  be  verey  wyse  &  lettered. 

But  one  myght  say  I  haue  nothing  promysed  to  God  /  I  was  a 
chyld  /  let  him  kepe  it  that  hath  promysed  for  me.  For  this  cause 
to  thintent  that  no  man  shulde  so  say  /  it  was  sumtyme  ordeyned 
that  none  shuld  be  baptysed  before  that  he  came  to  vnderstandynge 
and  knowlege  /  to  thintent  that  he  myght  promyse  hym  selfe  /  & 
forsake  the  deuyl,  &  that  he  myght  know  wha*^i  thing  he  had  pro- 
mised If  it  were  not  that  the  children  were  feble  &  in  peril  of  deth 
then  thei  must  haue  bin  baptised 

*  Fol.  vii,  recto  and  verso. 

2  Fol.  vii,  verso, — fol.  viii,  verso. 


The  Anabaptists  i7i  England  before  1612     45 

Nowe  allwayes  albeit  that  we  our  selfe  haue  not  promysed  we 
be  al  egally  bounde  to  obserue  it,  For  if  thou  haddest  dyed  when 
thou  were  but  a  yere  old  /  ...thou  wylt  saye  ye  /  by  the  fayth  of 
my  godfathers  and  godmothers  /  and  of  holy  churche.  I  say  agayn, 
doest  thou  confesse  that  the  faythe  of  thy  godfathers  &  godmothers 
is  so  myghty  that  thou  mayst  therby  be  saued  The  same  fayth  is 
lykewyse  myghty  to  subiecte  the  &  binde  the  to  that  thing  that 
they  haue  promysed  for  the  vnder  payne  of  thy  dampnacyon,  &  losse 
of  the  helth  wherfor  thou  must  aswell  kepe  this  that  thy  parentes 
haue  promysed  for  the,  as  though  thou  haddest  promised  it  thy  selfe. 
The  godfathers  &  the  godmothers  be  bounde  to  warne  the  chyldren  / 
and  to  helpe  them  that  they  be  put  to  scole  /  to  thintent  that  they 
may  vnderstonde  the  gospell  the  ioyfull  message  of  god  with  the 
epistels  of  S.  Paule.... 

This  author  is  in  fact  a  Roman  Catholic,  who  deplores 
the  ignorance  of  many  concerning  the  Pater  Noster  and  the 
Creeds — "alas /ye  shal  fynde  thousandes  of  auncyent  persones 
that  can  not  sey  the  pater  noster  &  Crede  in  thejrr  mother 
tongue,...". 

That  this  work  did  not  appear  to  critical  contemporaries 
to  be  written  by  an  Anabaptist,  is  easily  proved  by  examination 
of  a  "publick  instrument"  drawn  up  in  1530  by  order  of 
Henry  VIII  "  in  an  assembly  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
[William  Warham],  the  bishop  of  Durham  ",  condemning  the 
book  with  various  others.  The  original  of  this  document  is  in 
Archbishop  Warham's  Register,  and  the  text  is  given  in  Davide 
Wilkins'  "Concilia".-  The  criticism  of  "The  summe  of  the  holye 
scrypture"  is  rather  minute  and  extensive.  The  portion  of  it 
relating  to  baptism,  as  given  by  Wilkins,  reads^: — 

The  errours  and  heresies  conteyned  in  the  hoke 
called  "  The  sum  of  Scripture. 

The  water  of  the  fonte  hath  noo  more  vertue  in  it  than  hath 
the  water  of  ryver. 

The  baptisme  lyeth  not  in  halowed  water,  or  in  other  outward 
thinge,  but  in  the  faith  oonly.     6.  p.  1. 

Men  shulde  not  seeke  their  helthe  in  good  works,  but  alonly 
in  faith  and  grace.     1.  f.  2. 

The  water  of  baptisme  is  noo  thinge  but  a  signs  that  we  must 
be  under  the  standard  of  the  crosse.     12.  p.  2. 

1  Fol.  ix,  verso.  2  Vol.  in.,  pp.  727-739. 

3  Ihid.,  p.  730. 


46  Early  English  Dissenters 

"  The  summe  of  the  holye  scrypture  "  seems  to  have  been  in 
considerable  demand,  for  copies  of  at  least  three  editions  before 
1550  are  still  in  existence.  It  is  not  a  work,  however,  that 
advocates  separatism  in  the  smallest  degree,  and  there  appears 
to  be  no  evidence  that  it  had  any  perceptible  influence  in  that 
direction. 

The  subject  of  baptism  seems  to  have  exercised  the  minds 
of  various  other  early  writers,  but  while  their  works  may  also 
have  set  their  readers'  minds  actively  studying  the  matter,  it  is 
not  therefore  to  be  concluded  that  these  authors  were  in  the 
least  infected  with  Anabaptist  views.  One  of  the  works  that 
might  be  mentioned  here  is  William  Tyndall's  "The  obe- 
die|ce  of  a  Christen  man  and  how  Chrjiste  rulers  ought  to 
governe/  |  where  in  also  (yf  thou  ma^jrke  diligently)  th^jou 
shalt  fynde  |  eyes  to  pe#|rceave  |  the  |  crafty  conveyauce  of  all  [?]  | 
iugglers."  ["  Marlborow  [Marburg]  in  the  lade  of  Hesse  The 
seconde  daye  of  October.  Anno,  m.ccccc.  xxviij  "]  8°.  A  later 
edition  of  this  book  was  published  at  London  in  1561.  Joseph 
Ivimey  saw  a  copy  of  this  latter  edition,  or  at  least  has  a  citation 
from  it,  but  for  some  reason  mistakenly  calls  the  work  "  The 
obedience  of  all  degrees  proved  by  Gods  worde  ",  etc.  Certain 
expressions  in  his  citation  from  this  work  concerning  baptism 
seem  somewhat  to  have  puzzled  Ivimey'.  But  Tyndall,  of  course, 
had  no  intention  whatever  of  advocating  adult,  or  believers', 
baptism  instead  of  infant  baptism.  Another  scarce  book  that 
might  be  mentioned  here  is  I.[ohn]  F.[rith]'s  "  A  myrroure  |  or 
lokynge  glasse  wherin  |  you  may  beholde  the  |  Sacramente  of  | 
baptisme  de*| scribed.  |  Anno.  m.d.  xxxiii,  |  Per  me.  I.  F.  |  ..,", 
London,  8°,  48  unnumbered  pages.  Frith,  likewise,  is  opposed 
to  Anabaptism,  and  also  to  adult,  or  believers',  baptism  as  a 
general  principle. 

Not  long  after  the  publication  of  this  work,  in  1536  (?), 
appeared  William  Tyndall's  "A  Briefe  de* | claration  of  the 
sacraments,  expressing  |  the  fyrst  oryginall  how  they  came  |  vp, 
ad  were  institute  with  the  |  true  and  mooste  syncere  |  meaning 
and  vnder#|standyng  of  the  |  same...",  8°,  fol.  40. 

1  "A  History  of  the  English  Baptists :...",  London,  Vol.  i.,  1811,  p.  93. 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     47 

It  may  be  remarked  here  that  just  such  expressions  as 
surprised  Ivimey  so  much  in  Tyndall's  "The  obedie|ce"  may  be 
found  in  Archbishop  Cranmer's  "Catechismus",  London,  8°,  1548, 
which  though  said  to  be  the  revised  translation  of  a  work  by 
Justus  Jonas,  the  Elder,  must  to  some  extent  have  been  endorsed 
by  Cranmer,  as  he  at  least  sanctioned  its  publication*.  Not 
even  the  most  ardent  Baptist  historian  would  think  of  claiming 
either  Jonas  or  Cranmer  for  Anabaptists !  Yet  the  "  Cate- 
chismus "  has  the  following  passages : — 

lesus  Christe  dyd  institute  baptisme,  wherby  we  be  borne 
agayne  to  the  kyngdom  of  God.  And  you  good  children  shal  gyue 
dilygence,  not  onely  to  reherse  these  wordes,  but  also  to  vnderstand, 
what  Christ  ment  by  the  same.  That  when  you  be  demaunded  any 
questyon  herein,  you  maye  bothe  make  a  dyrecte  answere,  and  also 
in  tyme  to  come  be  able  to  teache  your  children,  as  you  your  selues 
are  nowe  instructed.  For  what  greater  shame  can  ther  be,  then  a 
man  to  professe  himselfe  to  be  a  Christen  man,  because  he  is  bap- 
tised, and  yet  he  knoweth  not  what  baptisme  is,  nor  what  strength 
the  same  hath,  nor  what  the  dyppyng  in  the  water  doth  betoken  ? 
wher  as  all  oure  lyfe  tyme  we  ought  to  kepe  those  promises,  which 
there  we  solemply  made  before  God  and  man,  and  all  oure  profession 
and  lyfe  ought  to  agre  to  our  baptisme.  Wherefore  good  children, 
to  thentent  you  may  the  better  know  the  strength  &  power  of 
baptisme,  you  shall  first  vnderstande,  that  our  lorde  lesus  Christ 
hath  instituted  and  annexed  to  the  gospel,  thre  sacraments  or  holy 
seales,  of  his  couenant  and  lege  mad  with  vs.  And  by  these  thre, 
gods  ministers  do  worke  with  vs  in  the  name  and  place  of  God  (yea 
God  himselfe  worketh  with  vs)  to  confirme  vs  in  our  faith,  <fe  to 
asserten  vs,  that  we  are  y^  lyuely  membres  of  Gods  trew  churche, 
and  y*^  chosen  people  of  God,  to  whome  the  gospell  is  sent,  and  that 
all  those  thinges  belong  to  vs,  wherof  the  promises  of  the  gospel 
make  mention.  The  first  of  these  sacramentes  is  baptisme,  by  the 
whiche  we  be  borne  again  to  a  new  and  heauenly  lyfe,  and  be 
receaued  into  gods  churche  and  congregation,  whiche  is  the  founda- 
tion and  pyller  of  the  trueth.  The  seconde  is  absolution  or  the 
authoritie  of  y*  kayes,  wherby  we  be  absolued  from  suche  synnes, 
as  we  be  fallen  into  after  our  baptisme.  The  thirde  sacrament  is 
the  communion  or  y**  Lordes  supper,...^ 

Wherfore  good  children  when  a  man  is  baptysed,  it  is  as  muche  to 
saye,  as  he  dothe  there  confesse,  that  he  is  a  synner,  and  that  he 

•  See  "Twelve  Hundred  Questions  on  the  History  of  the  Church  of 
England,"  London,  1888,  p.  135.  The  work  from  which  Cranmer's  "®atf« 
t|bidniU0"  was  translated  was  published  anonymously  at  Niirnberg  [in 
1533].     Its  title  was  "Catechismus  oder  Kinder  predig". 

'  Fol.  numbered  ccxv,  recto  and  verso — fol.  numbered  ccxiiii. 


48  Early  English  Dissenters 

is  vnder  the  rule  and  gouernaunce  of  synne,  so  that  of  himselfe  he 
can  not  be  good  or  ryghtuous.  And  therfore  he  commeth  to  baptisme, 
and  there  seketh  for  helpe  and  remedy,  and  desyreth  God,  first  to 
forgyue  him  his  synnes,  &  at  length  to  deliuer  him  clerely  from  all 
synne,  and  perfectely  to  heale  his  soule  from  the  sykenes  of  synne, 
as  the  physitian  doth  perfectely  heale  his  patient  from  bodily 
diseases.  And  for  his  parte  he  promyseth  to  God  againe,  and 
solemply  voweth,  that  he  wyll  fyght  againste  synne  with  all  his 
strength  and  power,  &  that  he  wyl  gladly  beare  the  crosse,  and  al 
suche  aflBictions,  as  it  shal  please  God  to  lay  vpon  him,  and  that  also 
he  wil  be  content  to  dye,  y*  he  may  be  perfectly  healed  and  de- 
lyuered  from  sinne'. 

Fourthly  by  baptisme  we  die  with  Christ,  and  are  buried  (as  it 
were)  in  his  bloude  &  death,  that  we  shoulde  suffer  afilictions  and 
death,  as  Christe  himself  hath  suffered.  And  as  that  man,  whiche 
is  baptised,  doth  promise  to  God,  that  he  will  dye  with  Christe,  that 
he  maye  be  deade  to  synne  and  to  the  olde  Adam,  so  on  the  other 
part  God  doth  promise  againe  to  him,  that  he  shalbe  partaker  of 
christes  deathe  and  passion  ^ 

By  thys  which  I  haue  hetherto  spoken,  I  trust  you  vnderstand 
good  children,  wherfore  baptisme  is  called  the  bath  of  regeneration, 
and  howe  in  baptisme  we  be  borne  agayne  and  be  made  new  creatures 
in  Christe '. 

Ye  shall  also  dylygently  labour  good  children,  to  kepe  and  per- 
fourme  those  promises,  which  you  made  to  God  in  your  baptisme, 
and  which  baptisme  doth  betoken.  For  baptisme  and  the  dyppyng 
into  the  water,  doth  betoken,  that  the  olde  Adam,  with  al  his  synne 
and  euel  lustes,  ought  to  be  drowned  and  kylled  by  daily  contrition 
and  repentance,  and  that  by  renewynge  of  the  holy  gost,  we  ought 
to  ryse  with  Christ  from  the  death  of  synne,  and  to  walke  in  a  new 
Ij^e,  that  our  new  man  maye  lyue  euerlastyngly,  in  rightuousnes 
and  truthe  before  God,  as  saincte  Paule  teacheth  saying.  Al  we 
that  are  baptised  in  Christe  lesu,  are  baptised  in  hys  death.  For 
we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptisme  into  deth,  that  as  Christ  hath 
risen  from  death  by  y®  glori  of  his  father,  so  we  also  shuld  walke  in 
newnes  of  lyfe.  And  this  is  the  playne  exposytion  of  y*"  wordes  of 
holy  baptisme,  y*  is  to  saye,  that  we  shoulde  acknowlege  oure  selues 
to  be  synners,  desyre  pardon  &  forgyuenes  of  our  synnes,  be  obedient 
<k  wylling  to  beare  Christes  crosse,  and  all  kynde  of  afflyction,  and  at 
the  last  to  die,  that  by  death  we  may  be  perfectly  deliuered  from 
synne*. 

Besides  that  great  light  of  the  Church  of  England,  William 

Tyndall  (Tyndale),  whom  Baptists  may  have  been  glad  to  claim 

*  Fol.  numbered  ccxvii,  verso — fol.  numbered  ccxvi. 

*  Fol.  numbered  ccxviii,  verso. 

3  Fol.  numbered  ccxviii,  verso — fol,  nimibered  ccxix. 

*  Fol.  numbered  ccxxiii. 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     49 

among  those  who  favoured,  or  seemed  to  favour,  their  views,  there 
are  certain  other  well-known,  but  less  prominent,  characters 
of  the  Reformation  period  who  have  curiously  appeared  in 
Baptist  histories  as  Baptists,  One  of  these  is  Anne  Askewe, 
who  was  burned  at  Smithfield  in  July,  1546.  If  the  reader, 
however,  will  carefully  peruse  the  text  of  her  examinations 
as  given  by  lohan  [John]  BaleS  he  will  readily  perceive 
that  she  was  not  an  Anabaptist,  nor  accused  of  Anabaptism. 
As  to  her  heresy,  she  says  she  is  of  no  sect,  and  that  "  thys  is 
the  heresye  whych  they  report  me  to  holde,  that  after  the  prest 
hath  spoken  the  words  of  consecracyon,  there  remayneth  breade 
styll." 

In  the  period  before  1550  there  was  at  least  one  Englishman 
who  was  unjustly  accused  by  his  contemporaries  of  being  an 
Anabaptist.  Just  who  this  individual  was  is  not  certainly 
known,  but  his  initials  were  I.  B.,  which  are  by  some  supposed 
to  stand  for  John  Bale.  In  Baptist  histories  he  has  not 
generally  been  noticed,  probably  because  of  the  rarity  of  his 
book  published  in  1547,  about  the  time  that  Bale  was  defending 
Aune  Askewe.  It  is  entitled,  "A  bryefe  and  i  plaine  declaracion 
of  certayne  j  senteces  in  this  litle  boke  folowing,  |  to  satisfie  the 
consciences  of  them  |  that  haue  iudged  me  therby  to  |  be  a 
fauourer  of  the  Anasjbaptistes. [...",  8°,  40  unnumbered  pages. 
This  work  contains  another  later  title-page  which  reads,  "  ^^  A 
BRIFE  AND  FAYTH;full  declaration  of  the  true  |  fayth  of 
Christ,  made  by  certeyne  |  men  susspected  of  heresye  |  in  these 
articles  |  folowyng.  |  ..."  That  I.  B.,  and  these  men  suspected  of 
heresy,  who  were  of  his  own  opinion,  were  not  Anabaptists  is 
shown  by  what  is  said  on  the  subject  of  baptism  in  the  section 
entitled,  "  To  the  reader  ",  where  I.  B.  says  :  "  First  thou  shalt 
note  that  I  am  no  fauourer  of  them  [the  Anabaptists]  or  theyr 

'  "  The  first  examinacyjjon  of  Anne  Askewe,  latelye  marityred  in 
Smythfelde,  by  the  Ro,'|mysh  vpholders,..."  [1546],  8"  [Marpurg]. 

"  The  lattre  examinacyjon  of  Anne  Askewe,  latelye  niarjtyred  in 
Smythfelde,  by  the  wyc;|ked  Synagogue  of  Antichrist,]  ...",  "1.  5. 
4.  7.",  8°  [Marpurg]. 

Copies  are  to  be  found  in  the  British  Museum.  Another  edition  of  the 
two  parts  was  in  the  Huth  Library, 

B.  4 


60  Early  English  Dissenters 

opinions,  for  that  I  shall  playnlye  declare  that  the  scriptures 
whyche  they  aledge,  make  nothynge  for  their  purpose  And 
then,  that  I  do  in  al  that  I  may  impugne  them,  by  that  I 
endeuour  to  establish  &  confyrme  by  the  scriptures  :  the 
contrarye  of  their  opinion.  For  the  fyrst  thou  shalt  note,  that 
the  ground  of  their  opinion  is  vpon  the  order  that  the  Euangelist 
Mark  kepeth  in  the  rehersing  of  the  wordes  of  Christ  to  his 
Apostles  when  he  sent  them  to  preach.  Marke.  xvi.  Fayth 
saye  they,  dothe  in  the  wordes  of  Christ  go  before  Baptisme. 
Necessarye  is  it  therefore,  that  he  that  shalbe  Baptised  do  first 
beleue.  But  the  Infantes  (which  haue  not  the  vse  of  reason) 
cannot  vnderstande  the  fayth  of  Chryst  (and  much  lesse 
embrace  and  professe  it)  wherfore,  it  cannot  stande  with  the 
worde  of  God  that  Infantes  should  be  baptised.  No  doubt 
(christen  reader)  it  is  not  possible  that  any  shoulde  be  accept- 
able before  God,  without  fayth.  For  so  writeth  Paul  to  the 
Hebrues.  xi.  And  truth  it  is  also,  that  fayth  must  go  before 
baptisme,  none  other  wyse  then  in  the  cause  proceadeth  or 
goeth  before  the  effect  or  thyng  that  commeth  thereof,...  But  to 
inferre  vpon  this,  that  the  Infantes  and  yong  chyldren  oughte 
not  to  be  baptised  :  is  far  wyde  from  the  true  meanynge  of 
these  places  of  scripture  ". 

I.  B.  was,  therefore,  not  an  Anabaptist,  but  certainly  he  had 
been  influenced  by  the  Continental  reformers,  and  if  Bale  was 
I.  B.,  he  was  probably  in  Marburg  on  the  Lahn  at  the  time  this 
work  was  published.  I.  B.  was  evidently  a  Nonconformist  in 
the  early  sense  of  that  word. 

We  may  now  turn  to  the  early  congregations  at  Faversham 
and  Booking,  which  appear  to  have  begun  to  hold  meetings 
about  the  time  of  the  promulgation  of  the  first  Act  of  Uniformity 
in  1549.  Until  comparatively  recent  times  these  conventiclers 
were  supposed  to  have  been  English  Anabaptists.  This  view 
seems  first  to  have  been  expressed  by  Dr  Gilbert  Burnet,  who 
in  speaking  of  the  congregation  at  Booking,  says,  "These  were 
probably  some  of  the  anabaptists,  though  that  is  not  objected 
to  them  ".  John  Strype  appears  to  have  accepted  this  opinion, 
but  unfortunately  for  the  truth  of  this  theory  there  is  plenty 
of  evidence  which  makes  it  perfectly  plain  that  they  were  not 


The  Anabaptists  m  England  before  1612     51 

Anabaptists  in  any  full  sense.  Dr  Richard  Watson  Dixon ^ 
accordingly,  thinks  of  them  as  being  the  first  English  separatists, 
a  more  natural  view,  but  one  which,  also,  in  my  opinion,  is  not 
quite  sufficiently  supported  by  the  evidence  still  available. 
Without  further  information,  therefore,  we  may  express  the 
opinion,  that  these  early  English  conventiclers  may  best  be 
known  by  some  such  title,  and  that,  as  a  whole,  they  were 
merely  Nonconformists  (in  the  early  meaning  of  that  term)  of 
a  rather  peculiar  type. 

The  most  reliable  information  at  present  known  regarding 
these  conventiclers  is  to  be  found  in  Harleian  MS.  421  (fol. 
133-34  verso)  in  the  British  Museum,  and  in  the  Privy 
Council  Register  at  the  Public  Record  Office,  Most  of  the 
evidence  from  these  sources  is  given  in  the  volume  of  docu- 
ments. From  these  old  records  the  following  points  of  interest 
have  been  gleaned  : — 

While  conventiclers  may  have  begun  independently  and 
almost  simultaneously  to  hold  meetings  at  Faversham  in  Kent, 
and  at  Booking  in  Essex,  the  evidence  we  still  possess  suggests 
that  small  gatherings  were  first  held  at  several  places  in  Kent, 
or  in  Faversham,  including  one  Cole's  house  in  Faversham,  and 
that  some  time  between  June  23,  1550'^  and  Jan.  26, 1550/1  ^ 
on  account  of  impending  persecution,  the  Kentish  conventiclers 
removed  to  Booking  in  Essex,  where  some  Nonconformist 
interest  probably  was  already  known  to  exist. 

At  Booking  early  in  1551  after  the  arrival  of  the  Faversham 
party  the  conventiclers  appear  to  have  numbered  over  sixty 
persons.  The  names  of  a  good  many  of  them  have  been  gleaned 
from  the  papers  mentioned  above,  namely,  John  Grey;  William 
Forstall ;  Laurence  Ramsey ;  Edmonde  Morres ;  one  Cole  of 
Faversham ;  Henry  Harte ;  Thomas  Broke ;  Roger  Lynsey ; 
Richarde  Dynestake,  clerk;  George  Brodebridge;  Vmfrey 
Middilton  [Humphrey  Middleton];  Nicholas,  or  Thomas,  Yonge 

*  "History  of  the  Church  of  England",  etc.,  Vol.  iii.,  Second  Edition, 
Revised,  pp.  206-11. 

2  See  the  published  "Acts  of  the  Privy  Council  of  England",  New  Series, 
Vol.  III.,  London,  1891,  p.  53, 

3  Jbid.,  p.  197, 

4—2 


52  Early  English  Dissenters 

of  "Lannams"  [Lenham  ?];  one  Vpcharde  [Upcharde]  of  Booking; 
one  [Cuthbert?]  Sympson;  John  Barrett  [Barrey?]  of  Stamford, 
cowherd  ;  Robert  Cooke  of  Booking,  clothier ;  John  Eglise,  or 
Eglins,  of  Booking,  clothier;  Richard  Bagge,  or  Blagge;  Thomas 
Pygrinde,  or  Piggerell;  John  Kinge;  one  Myxsto,  or  Myxer;  one 
Boughtell ;  Robert  Wolmere  ;  William  Sibley  of  "  Lannams  " 
[Lenham  ?] ;  Nicholas  Shetterton,  or  Sheterenden,  of  Pluckley ; 
John  Lydley  of  Ashford ;  one  Cole  of  Maidstone,  schoolmaster ; 
Thomas  Sharpe  of  Pluckley;  one  Chidderton  of  Ashford;  William 
Grenelande ;  and  John  Plume  of  Lenham.  Among  the  leaders 
were  Cole  of  Faversham,  Henry  Harte,  George  Brodebridge, 
Cole  of  Maidstone,  Nicholas  Yonge,  and  especially  Humphrey 
Middleton  and  Cuthbert  Sympson. 

The  conventiclers  appear  to  have  maintained  rather  varied 
views,  only  occasionally  to  have  held  their  meetings,  and  not  to 
have  constituted  any  well-developed  organization.  The  various 
opinions  advanced  by  the  conventiclers  are  noticeably  Pelagian 
and  anti-Calvinistic,  and  clearly  differentiate  them  from  the 
earliest  Nonconformists,  but  nevertheless,  in  my  opinion,  do 
not  prove  that  they  were  separatists  in  any  modern  sense. 
Accordingly,  as  has  been  suggested  above,  in  the  absence  of 
a  better  descriptive  term,  we  will  merely  denominate  them 
early  Nonconformist  conventiclers.  Here  are  some  of  the 
unusual  views  expressed  in  their  gatherings : — 

Cole  of  Faversham  is  said  to  have  asserted  that  the  doctrine 
of  predestination  was  meeter  for  devils  than  for  Christian  men. 
Henry  Harte,  it  is  said,  stated  that  God  did  not  predestinate 
men  to  election  or  reprobation,  but  that  their  position  in  relation 
to  these  two  states  depended  entirely  upon  themselves.  It  is 
also  reported  that  Harte  claimed  that  learned  men  were  the 
cause  of  great  errors,  and  that  Cole  of  Maidstone  had  affirmed 
that  children  were  not  born  in  original  sin.  William  Grenelande 
declared  that  to  play  at  any  game  for  money  was  sin.  John 
Plume  of  Lenham  deposed,  that  it  was  taught  among  other 
things  in  the  congregation,  that  one  ought  not  to  salute  a  sinner 
or  an  entire  stranger ;  that  Humphrey  Middleton  had  asserted 
that  all  men  were  predestinated  to  be  saved ;  that  it  was 
generally  affirnaed  io  the  congregation,  thatCPredestin^rbion  is 


The  Anahaptists  in  England  before  1612     53 

a  damnable  doctrine;  and  finally,  that  Nicholas  Yonge  had  said 
they  would  not  communicate  with  sinners. 

After  the  conventiclers  had  moved  to  Booking  a  meeting 
was  held  at  Upcharde's  house  one  Sunday  at  twelve  o'clock, 
where  sixty  or  more  people,  including  several  residents  of 
Booking,  were  present,  and  discussed  whether  it  were  necessary 
to  stand  or  kneel  at  prayer,  and  whether  with  their  hats  on  or 
off, — a  discussion  which  was  concluded  by  the  decision  that 
such  externals  were  unimportant.  Apparently  at  this  meeting 
in  Bocking  the  conventiclers  were  arrested.  Some  of  them,  at 
least,  were  soon  brought  before  the  Privy  Council,  where  they 
admitted  that  they  had  held  their  meetings  "  for  talke  of 
Scriptures",  and  had  refused  the  communion  [in  the  Church 
of  England]  for  more  than  two  years  "  vpon  verie  superstitiouse 
and  erronyose  purposes  :  withe  Divers  other  evill  oppynyons 
worthie  of  great  punyshement ".  Accordingly  some  of  their 
number  were  committed  to  prison,  while  others  were  released 
on  bail,  on  the  condition  that  they  should  appear  before  the 
Privy  Council  when  called  upon,  and  in  case  they  had  any 
further  religious  difficulties,  that  they  should  repair  to  their 
Ordinary.  Whether  the  conventiclers  continued  to  hold  meetings 
after  their  release  is  not  clear,  but  we  know  from  John  Foxes 
"Acts  and  Monuments",  that  Humphrey  Middleton  and  Cuthbert 
Sympson  were  both  burned  at  the  stake  a  few  years  later  during 
the  reign  of  Queen  Mary. 

One  of  those  persons  who  have  been  iucoiTCctly  reckoned  as 
Anabaptists  in  Baptist  histories^  is  Richard  Woodman.  Several 
years  ago  I  found  a  contemporary  manuscript  copy  of  Woodman's 
"Confession"  hidden  away  in  the  Library  of  Gonville  and  Caius 
College,  Cambridge ^  It  is  clearly  written  and  contains  import- 
ant material,  the  existence  of  which  was  evidently  unknown  to 
the  writer  of  the  article  on  Woodman  in  the  Dictionary  of 
National  Biography.  It  appears  herein  that "  Richarde  Wodman  " 
was  "  late  of  y^  parishe  of  Walebilton  in  y®  countye  of  Sussexe ", 

•  Ivimey's  "A  History  of  the  English  Baptists",  Vol.  i.,  pp.  97-8,  whose 
information  is  taken  from  Crosby's  "The  History  of  the  English  Baptists", 
Vol.  I.,  p.  63. 

2  Press-mark,  233. 


64  Early  Eiiglish  Dissenters 

and  that  he  had  at  the  time  he  writes  this  confession  already 
been  "  prisoner  in  y*  kinges  benehe  "  "  one  wholle  yere  the  sixt 
daye  of  lune  laste  paste,  for  y*  Testimonye  of  lesus  Chryste. 
1552."  He  says  he  has  been  slandered  as  maintaining  certain 
opinions  that  he  does  not  believe.  He  names  various  errors 
held  by  religious  men  in  his  day,  and  gives  an  extended  and 
clear  exposition  of  his  own  views.  That  Woodman  was  not  an 
Anabaptist  is  clearly  manifested  by  the  following  direct  state- 
ment^ which  shows  his  exact  position : — 

And  Therfore  I  do  here  confesse  &  beleve  y''  the  custome  vsed 
in  y®  churche  of  god  to  chrysten  yonge  children  ys  moste  godly  and 
agreinge  to  y*  worde  of  god,  and  Therfore  to  be  commendyde  and  in 
any  wyse  to  be  retayned  in  Christes  churche.  And  I  do  vtterly 
dyssent  frome  y®  Anabaptystes,  w'^  hold  y^  contrary,  howbeit  I  beleve 
them  to  be  saved  by  y**  meryttes  and  mercy  of  god  in  christe.  Also 
I  beleve  y*^  yf  y*^  childe  be  baptysed  in  y^  name  of  god  y''  father,  y® 
Sonne  and  y*^  holy  ghoste  (as  Christe  hath  commaunded  vs  [)],  that 
then  it  is  truly  &  sufficientlie  baptysed  (be  y^  mynister  never  so 
wicked  in  lyfe  or  learnynge  y''  doth  baptyse  it)  for  the  effecte  of 
godes  ordynaunce,  doth  not  depende  vpon  the  worthynes  of  y® 
mynister,  but  of  y*^  truthe  of  godes  promyses,  and  I  do  beleve  y' 
those  children  y*  have  bene,  be,  or  shalbe  baptysed  of  y^  papisticall 
mynisters,  be  truly  baptysed,  notw*^standinge  that  y"  minister  be  a 
popishe  heretyke.  Howbeit  this  I  do  confesse  and  beleve  y*  no 
christian  man  oughte  to  bringe  or  sonde  his  childe  to  the  papistycall 
churche  to  requyre  baptysme  at  thaire  handes.  thaye  beinge  Anti- 
christes  mynisters,  for  in  so  doynge  he  doth  confesse  them  to  be  the 
trewe  churche,  w*^**  is  a  grevous  synne  in  the  sighte  of  god,.... 

As  to  the  life  of  David  George  [Joris]  Ivimey  has  made 
a  curious  mistake.  Crosby  had  correctly  given  a  brief  story  of 
his  life,  and  calls  him  an  Anabaptist.  Ivimey  obtained  his 
information  from  Crosby,  but  mistaking  his  meaning,  says  that 
George  "  died  in  London  ", — a  most  remarkable  statement,  as  it 
is  quite  contrary  to  the  facts, — and  adds  also  what  is  not  in 
Crosby  and  incorrect  as  well,  "  It  is  probable  that  David  George 
was  a  member  of  a  church  of  foreign  Baptists  that  was  formed 
in  London  in  the  former  reign  "^.  This  is  a  good  example  of 
the  careless  way  in  which,  it  is  to  be  feared,  too  much  early 
Baptist  history  has  been  written.     It  is  well  known  that  David 

1  On  p.  37  of  the  MS. 

'^  Ivimey's  "A  History  of  the  English  Baptists",  Vol.  i.,  p.  98. 


The  Anabaptists  in  Eiigland  before  1612     55 

George  has  long  been  considered  an  Anabaptist.  For  this 
opinion,  however,  there  really  seems  to  be  very  little  foundation 
except  in  a  generic  use  of  that  term,  if  we  can  trust  the  account 
of  his  life  and  death  published  in  Elnglish  at  Basel  in  1560. 
This  pamphlet  is  entitled  "Dauid  Gorge  /  |  borne  in  Holland  /. . .", 
and  gives  a  detailed  life  of  George.  He  seems  to  have  been 
a  fanatic  of  the  type  of  the  late  Alexander  Dowie,  but  evidently 
exalted  himself  to  an  even  higher  position  than  Dowie  ever 
attempted  to  claim.  George  certainly  had  nothing  whatever 
to  do  with  English  Anabaptists, — the  point  with  which  we  are 
chiefly  concerned. 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  before  1550  no  works  by 
English  Anabaptists,  or  English  translations  of  the  works  of 
foreign  Anabaptists,  are  known.  Furthermore,  it  is  exceedingly 
difficult  to  believe  that  the  books  of  Continental  Anabaptists 
in  their  original  form  could  have  been  read  at  all  in  England 
by  the  common  people  at  that  time,  or,  if  they  were  read,  would 
have  had  any  influence  on  account  of  the  strong  English  pre- 
judice against  the  very  name  Anabaptist.  Nevertheless,  the 
English  public  became  acquainted  with  some  of  the  leading 
views  of  Continental  Anabaptists  long  before  1550,  and  about 
that  time  several  books,  most  of  them  translations  of  continental 
works,  or  parts  of  them,  against  the  Anabaptists,  are  known  to 
have  been  published.  The  first  appeared  in  1548  under  the 
title,  "H  AN-HOLI^^  SOME  ^  \  ^4?  Antidotus  C9^  \ 
or  counters  I  poysen,  |  agaynst  the  pestylent  \  heresye  and  secte  | 
of  the  Anabap*  I  tistes  new#|ly  trans?  jlated  |  out  |  of  lati  |  into 
Englysh  by  John  |  Veron,  Senonoys.  |  ^^(::)=Ci"  ["  Im- 
printyd  at  London,  by  Humfrey  j  Powell,  dwellyng  Aboue 
Hols|burne  Conduit."]  8*",  pp.  ii,  228,  unnumbered^  It  contains 
among  other  points  of  interest  definitions  of  the  words  "  Ana- 
baptist "  and  "  Catabaptist "  made  by  one  of  their  most  noted 
opponents  at  the  time  when  the  Anabaptists  were  first  becoming 

1  This  is  said  to  be  a  translation  of  the  first  book  of  Leo  Juda's  enlarged 
edition  of  a  work  by  Heinrich  Bullinger,  which  Juda  published  at  Zurich 
in   1535  under  the  title,  "^^   ADVER,-|SVS  OMNIA   CATA=|BAP- 
TISTARVM    PRAVA   DOQ=|?wato  ffeiniychi  Bullingeri  lib.  IIII.  per 
Leonem  ludae  aucti..." 


56  Early  English  Dissenters 

well  known  throughout  Europe.  In  the  so-called  Whitsitt 
Controversy  the  question  arose  as  to  what  was  the  distinction 
between  these  two  words.  It  was  claimed  that  Anabaptism 
meant  simply  rebaptism,  but  that  Catabaptism  meant  rebaptism 
by  immersion.  Dr  George  A.  Lofton  disposed  of  this  theory ^ 
but  the  exact  difference  in  the  meaning  of  these  two  words  is 
possibly  made  a  little  more  plain  from  their  juxtaposition  in 
the  following  citation  on  page  14  of  this  early  work :  "  thys 
abhomynable  secte.  of  y^  Catababtistys  (for  they  ware  called 
anabaptistys,  because  y*"  they  ware  autors  of  rebaptization,  or 
babtizyng  agayne,  and  Catabaptistys,  because,  y*  they  dyd 
speake  and  hold  oppynyon,  agaynst  the  baptisme  of  children). . .". 
The  prefixes  "  Ana  "  and  "  Cata  ",  therefore,  in  no  way  indicate 
the  mode  of  baptism  practised  by  those  to  whom  these  names 
were  applied. 

The  next  work  in  English  against  the  Anabaptists  was 
published  at  London  in  1549,  and  is  by  "Mayster  lohn  Caluine". 
The  printer  was  "lohn  Daye".  It  is  entitled,  "A  short  |  instruc- 
tion for  to  I  arme  all  good  Christian  |  people  agaynst  the  pesti*| 
ferous  errours  of  the  |  common  secte  of  |  Anabapti*  j  stes ". 
[London.]  8°,  158  unnumbered  pages.  Dibdin  incorrectly 
dates  this  1544,  evidently  by  a  typographical  error.  The 
Preface  to  the  Reader  is  headed,  "  C  lohn  Caluine  to  the 
ministers  of  the  churches  in  the  countie  of  Newcastel ",  and  is 
dated,  "  From  Geneua  the  fyrst  of  lune.  Anno  Domini  .M.D. 
xl.iiii."  This  work,  therefore,  seems  to  have  been  written  with 
a  special  pui-pose  to  the  churches  in  "  Newcastel"  in  1544,  and 
is  not,  like  some  of  the  works  translated,  of  little  special  signi- 
ficance in  English  church  history.  The  seven  main  articles  of 
belief  of  the  moderate  Anabaptists  are  separately  given,  and 
opposed  from  the  orthodox  point  of  view.  To  these  are  added 
two  or  three  less  generally  accepted  articles,  which  are  also,  in 
like  manner,  discussed.  In  1551  "  Ihon  Veron"  published  two 
books,  both  probably  translations  of  parts  of  Leo  Juda's  pre- 
viously mentioned  edition  of  Heinrich  Bullinger's  noted  work 
against  the  Anabaptists,  entitled,  "  ^^  \  ADVER.jSVS  OM- 
NIA CATA.|BAPTISTARVM  PRAVA  DOG.jmato  Heinrychi 
1  "English  Baptist  Reformation",  Louisville,  Kentucky,  1899,  pp.  24-7. 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     57 

Bullingeri  lib.  IIII.  per  \  Leonevi  ludae  micti  adeb  ut  pri- 
orem  |  ceditionem  uix  agnoscas.  |  ...",  Tigvri  [Ziirich.],  1535. 
Both  were  printed  in  octavo  at  Worcester  and  may  possibly 
have  formed  two  parts  of  one  work,  each  part  having  a  sepa- 
rate title-page.  One  of  these  books  covers  44  unnumbered 
leaves  and  bears  the  title,  "  C  A  most  necessary  &  frutefull  j 
Dialogue,  betwene  y^  seditious  Libertin  j  or  rebel  Anabaptist,  & 
the  true  obedient  |  christia,  wherin,  as  in  a  mirrour  or  glasse  | 
ye  shal  se  y®  excellencie  and  worthynesse  j  of  a  christia  magistrate: 
&  again  what  |  obedience  is  due  vnto  publique  ru|lers  of  al 
the  y'  professe  Christ  |  ..."  The  other  covers  88  unnum- 
bered leaves  and  has  the  title,  "C  A  moste  sure  and  |  strong 
defence  of  the  bap*|tisme  of  children,  against  y®  ]  pestiferous 
secte  of  the  A,- 1  nabaptystes.  set  furthe  by  \  that  famouse  Gierke, 
Henjry  Builynger :  &  nowe  |  translated  out  of  La*  |  ten  into 
Englysh  |  by  lohn  Ve<  ron  Seno|noys.  |  ..."  All  of  these 
works  are  scarce. 

By  the  publication  of  Confessions  of  Faith  with  articles 
opposing  the  Anabaptists,  as  well  as  of  works  such  as  these 
just  mentioned,  more  than  by  any  other  means  it  would  seem, 
Anabaptism  at  first  became  known  to  the  English  people. 
Whether  the  appearance  of  these  works  contrary  to  the  in- 
tention of  their  publishers  caused  the  spread  of  Anabaptist 
views,  or  whether  such  books  were  published  to  ward  off  danger 
caused  by  the  actual  spreading  of  Anabaptism  among  the 
English,  is  not  apparent.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  the  first  English 
work  favouring  certain  Anabaptist  opinions  was  evidently  pro- 
duced about  1550  and  was  answered  by  "Wyllyam  Turner"  in 
his  little  volume  published  in  1551,  entitled,  "A  preseruati* | ue, 
or  triacle,  agaynst  the  |  poyson  of  Pelagius,  lately  [  reneued,  & 
styrred  vp  agayn,  |  by  the  furious  secte  of  |  the  Annabaptistes:  | 
deuysed  by  Wyl^jlyam  Turner,  |  Doctor  of  Physick.  |  ...",  8°, 
206  unnumbered  pages.  The  author  of  the  so-called  Anabaptist 
work,  against  which  Turner  wrote,  and  which  probably  was 
never  published,  was  one  Robert  Cooche  (=  Robert  Couche  or 
Cooke)  as  is  proved  by  the  latter  part  of  a  Latin  letter*  dated 

1  In  a  collected  volume  of  letters  of  John  Parkhurst,  Bishop  of  Norwich, 
now  in  the  University  Library,  Cambridge  [Press-mark  Ee .  2 .  34  (20)]. 


58  Eai-ly  English  Dissenters 

Feb.  6,  1574  (Feb.  16,  1575,  New  Style),  written  by  Bishop 
Parkhurst  of  Norwich,  and  addressed  to  D[r].  Rod:[olphus] 
Gualtherus,  Tigiirinus  [i.e.,  of  Zurich],  of  which  the  important 
part  of  the  text  is  given  in  the  volume  of  documents,  Cooche 
is  also  mentioned  in  another  earlier  letter  of  Parkhurst  to 
Gualther,  dated  June  29,  1574^  a  part  of  which  is  likewise 
given  in  the  volume  of  documents. 

Since  Cooche's  book,  as  Turner  styles  it,  was  probably  never 
printed,  it  is  fortunate  for  us  that  Turner  has  cited  in  his 
"  preseruatiue  "  several  quotations  from  Cooche's  manuscript. 
In  fact,  without  Turner's  book  and  the  letters  previously 
mentioned,  even  the  name  of  Robert  Cooche  might  hardly 
now  be  known,  so  that  in  Cooche's  case,  as  in  many  others  of 
later  date,  we  have  to  thank  his  opponents  for  preserving 
almost  all 2  that  is  now  known  of  his  life  and  character. 

Early  in  his  work^  Dr  Turner  naively  tells  of  his  own 
clerical  aspirations  and  of  how  he  happened  to  write  his  "  pre- 
seruatiue ",  as  well  as  of  how  Cooche  (whom  he  does  not  call  by 
name  throughout)  came  to  write  his  book : — 

But  after  that  my  lorde  Arche  byshop  of  Yorke,  had  ones  geuen 
me  a  prebende:  I  could  not  be  quiet,  vntill  that  I  had  licence 
to  reade,  or  preache.  Whiche  obteyned :  I  began  to  rede,  and  so 
to  discharge  mi  conscience.  And  because  I  dyd  perceyue,  that 
diuerse  began  to  be  infected  with  the  poysen  of  Pellagius :  I  deuised 
a  lecture  in  Thistelworth,  agaynst  two  of  the  opinions  of  Pelagius : 
namely  against  that  childer  haue  no  original  sin,  «fe  that  they  oughte 
not  to  be  baptised.  But  within  a  few  wekes  after  :  one  of  Pelagius 
disciples,  in  the  defence  of  his  masters  doctrine,  wrote  against  my 
lecture,  with  all  the  cunnyng  and  learning,  that  he  had.  But  lest 
he  should  glorye  and  crake  amonge  his  disciples,  that  I  could  not 
aunswer  him  :  and  to  the  intent,  that  the  venemous  seede  of  his 
soweyng  maye  be  destroyed,  and  so  hyndered  from  bryngyng  forth 
frute :  I  haue  set  out  this  boke,  to  aunswer  hym,  in  the  one  of  his 
opinions:.... 

From  this  citation  it  seems  likely  that  the  two  opinions 

1  lUd.  [Press  mark,  Ee .  2 .  34  (23)]. 

2  A  letter  from  Robert  Cooche  to  Rodolph  Gualter  dated  at  the 
Queen's  Palace,  Aug.  13,  1573,  is  given  in  "The  Zurich  Letters"  (Second 
Series),  Parker  Society,  Cambridge,  1845,  pp.  236-7.  Some  facts  of 
Cooche's  life  are  also  mentioned  in  a  note. 

3  "A  preseruatiue...",  sig.  aui  recto. 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     59 

advocated  by  Cooche  were  (1)  that  children  are  not  tainted  \vith 
original  sin,  and  (2)  that  they  ought  not  to  be  baptised.  This 
book  of  Turner's  is  a  reply  only  to  the  first,  but  he  makes 
a  promise,  apparently  never  fulfilled,  that  when  he  has  pub- 
lished his  "Herbal",  he  will  answer  Cooche's  second  opinion  also, 
a  promise  which  later  he  qualifies^  with  the  words,  "yf  it  shall 
be  thought  expedient  to  the  churche  to  do  so."  Turner  has 
no  love  for  his  opponent's  views,  and  yet  he  does  not  advocate 
persecution.     He  says  ^: — 

This  monstre  is  in  many  poyntes  lyke  vnto  the  watersnake 
with  seuen  heades.  For  as  out  of  one  bodye  rose  seuen  heades: 
So  out  of  Pelagius  rose  vp  these  seuen  sectes :  Anabaptistes, 
Adamites,  Loykenistes,  Libertines,  Swengfeldianes,  Dauidianes,  and 
the  spoylers.  Sum  would  thincke  :  that  it  were  the  best  way,  to 
vse  the  same  weapones  agaynst  thys  manyfolde  monstre,  that  the 
papistes  vsed  agaynst  vs  :  that  is  material  fyre,  and  faggot.  But 
me  thynk  :  seyng  it  is  no  materiall  thynge,  that  we  must  fyght 
withal,  but  gostly,  that  is  a  woode  spirite  :  that  it  were  moste  mete, 
that  we  should  fyght  with  the  sworde  of  goddes  word,  and  with  a 
spirituall  fyre  against  it :  elles  we  are  lyke  to  profit  but  a  litle  in 
our  besynes  [business] . . .  Then  when  as  the  enemie  is  a  spirite,  that 
is,  the  goste  of  pelagius,  that  olde  heretike :  ones  welle  laid,  but  now 
of  late  to  the  great  ieperdie  of  many  raysed  vp  agayn  :  the  wepones, 
&  the  warriers,  that  must  kyll  thys  enemie,  must  be  spirituall.  As 
for  spiritual  weapons :  we  may  haue  enow  out  of  the  store  house, 
or  armory  of  the  scripture  :  to  confound  &  ouertrow  all  the  gostly 
enemies:  be  they  never  so  many[.]  But  where,  &  from  whence,  shal 
we  haue  spiritual  warriers  ynow  fit  for  this  fyght  ?  If  that  we  had 
no  mo  enamies,  but  this  alone,  the  fewer  soldiers  would  serue  :...we 
had  nede  of  a  great  dele  of  mo  souldiers,  then  al  the  scoles  that  are 
in  this  realme  are  able  to  set  furth  :  if  so  many  scoles  haue  bene  put 
down  of  late,  as  the  comon  rumor  reporteth.... 

The  gi-eater  number  of  citations  firom  Cooche's  work  are  not 
extended  or  highly  interesting,  but  from  them  and  Turner's 
own  remarks  we  get  a  very  good  idea  of  his  views.  At  that 
time  dipping,  or  immersion,  of  infants  was  the  rule,  for  Turner 
says^*:  "  And  because  baptim  [baptism]  is  a  passiue  Sacrament, 
&  no  man  can  baptise  hym  self,  but  is  baptised  of  an  other: 
&  childer  may  be  as  wel  dipped  into  the  water  in  y*  name  of 

1  "A  preseruatme...",  sig.  Nvi.  *  Ihid,  sig.  aui  verso— aiv  recto. 

'  Ihid.,  sig.  GvUi  recto  and  verso. 


60  Early  English  Dissenters 

Christ  (which  is  the  outward  baptym  and  as  myche  as  one  man 
can  gyue  an  other)  euen  as  olde  folke :...". 

Turner  also  gives  a  very  direct  statement  as  to  Cooche's 
views  concerning  original  sin  and  the  proper  time  for  the 
administration  of  baptism^ : — 

is  the  matter  of  origynall  synne  no  pai-t  of  scripture  ?  you  do  holde 
that  there  is  none  at  all,  and  therefore  that  the  childer  nede 
not,  nother  ought  to  be  baptysed,  vntyll  they  be  .xiiij  yeare  olde  : 
before  whiche  tyme,  they  haue  done  many  actuall  synnes,  whyche 
hadde  nede  to  be  wasshed  awaye,  wyth  the  bath  of  baptime.... 

As  to  Cooche's  person  and  state  in  life.  Turner  has  some 
amusing  words'' :  "  GOD  neuer  in  his  worde  expressedly  com- 
maunded  his  Apostlles  to  suffer  suche  tal  men  as  you  bee  to 
lyue  syngle :  therfore  your  curate  doth  wrong  to  suffer  yow  to 
lyue  sjmgle." 

The  above  mentioned  letters  referring  to  Cooche  also  give 
us  a  very  good  idea  of  his  abilities  and  character.  He  finally 
abandoned  his  heretical  opinions. 

Thus  we  know  the  case  of  at  least  one  Englishman  of  high 
position  about  1550  who  held  two  opinions  maintained  by  the 
Anabaptists.  Are  we  then  justified  in  believing  that  his  case 
was  isolated,  and  that  he  did  not  belong  to  a  congregation 
either  of  English  or  of  foreign  Anabaptists  ?  Certainly,  for 
Cooche  is  nowhere  mentioned  as  a  separatist,  but  as  a  member 
of  the  Church  of  England  and  under  the  charge  of  a  curate  ! 

From  time  to  time  until  the  last  quarter  of  the  sixteenth 
century  foreign  Anabaptists  continued  to  come  over  into  England, 
though  in  how  great  numbers  it  is  now  difficult  to  say.  They 
do  not  appear  to  have  been  numerous,  but  as  soon  as  they  in 
any  way  manifested  their  faith,  they  were  imprisoned  and  com- 
pelled to  recant,  or,  if  they  refused,  were  hui'ried  out  of  the 
country,  or  were  burned  at  the  stake.  Those  who  were  burned 
are  reported  to  have  been  brave,  and  to  have  met  their  death 
joyfully  to  the  astonishment  of  the  beholders.  From  seeing 
their  heroism  some  of  the  English  may  have  been  favourably 
impressed,  but  it  is  significant  that  the  names  of  no  genuine 

1  "A  preseruatiue...",  sigs.  Hy  recto  and  verso. 
^  Ibid.,  sig.  Kvii  verso. 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     61 

English  Anabaptists  before  1593  or  1594  seem  to  have  been 
recorded  ^  To  be  sure  various  gatherings  of  the  early  Puritans 
were  spoken  of  as  Anabaptistical,  and  even  Barrowe  and  Green- 
wood were  ridiculed  as  Anabaptists,  but  these  facts  of  course  do 
not  affect  our  argument,  as  it  is  generally  well  known  to-day 
that  the  Puritans  and  the  Barrowists  were  not  Anabaptists, 
and  that  others  besides  Puritans  and  Barrowists  were  sometimes 
labelled  with  this  term  of  opprobrium. 

In  1555  was  published  a  translation  by  Thomas  Cotsford  of 
a  work  by  Ulrich  Zwingli  bearing  the  title,  "The  accompt  re* I 
kenynge  and  confession  of  the  faith  |  of  Huldrik  Zwinglius  byshop 
of  I  Zuryk...",  Geneva,  8°,  pp.  xxxii,  119.  This  contains  at  the 
end,  beginning  with  page  95,  "An  Epistle  writ- 1  ten  to  a  good 
Lady /for  the  comfort  |  of  a  frende  of  hers,  wherin  the  Noua-| 
tions  erroure  now  reuiued  by  |  the  Anabaptistes  is  con*[futed, 
and  the  synne  a*|gaynste  the  holy  |  Goste  playnly  }  declared". 
I  have  somewhere  seen  what  may  prove  to  be  the  original 
English  manuscript  of  this  Epistle,  or  a  contemporary  copy  of 
it,  bearing  the  title,  "  An  epistyll  written  wherin  the  novacions 
Error  now  newly  |  Revisid  by  the  secte  of  Anabaptystes  /  is 
Confuted  &  the  tru  dyifynyssen  |  of  the  syne  Ageynst  the  holy 
gost  playnly  Declaryde — ".  The  spelling  suggests  a  North 
Country  source,  and  the  handwriting  would  indicate  that  the 
manuscript  was  written  about  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century. 

Likewise  about  1556  was  published  the  following  work : — 
"C  Two  bokes  of  the  noble  doctor  |  and  B.  S.  Augustine  thone 
entitejled  of  the  Predestiu[=n]acion  of  sain«|tes,  thother  of 
perseueraunce  vnto  |  thende,  whervnto  are  annexed  the  |  deter- 
minacions  of  two  auncient  ge|nerall  Councelles,  confermyng 
the  I  doctrine  taught  in  these  bokes  by  s.  |  Aug.  all  faythfully 
translated  out  of  |  Laten  into  Englyshe  by  lohn  Scosjry  the 
late  B.[ishop]  of  Chichester,  very  ne#]cessary  for  al  tymes,  but 
namely  for  |  oures,  wherin  the  Papistes  &  Ana#|baptistes  haue 
reuiued  agayne  |  the  wyked   opinions  of  the  |  Pelagias,   that 

*  These  first  genuine  English  Anabaptists  arose  on  the  Continent,  but 
one  of  them  at  least  was  in  an  English  prison  about  1597,  as  will  be  seen 
in  Chapter  IX. 


62  Early  English  Dissenters 

extolled  mas  |  wyll  &  merites  agaynst  |  the  fre  grace  of  | 
Christ",  8°,  fol.  123. 

The  indefatigable  "Ihon  Veron"  in  1559,  or  about  that 
date,  published  two  more  works  bearing  on  this  interesting 
topic.  One  dated  1559  has  the  following  title,  "C  A  moste  | 
necessary  treatise  of  free  |  wil,  not  onlye  against  the  Pa#|  pistes, 
but  also  against  the  Anabap^jtistes,  which  in  these  our  daies, 
go  I  about  to  renue  the  detestable  here#|sies  of  Pelagius,  and 
of  the  Luciferians,  |  whiche  say  and  affirm,  that  we  |  be  able  by 
our  own  natural  |  strength  to  fulfil  the  law  |  and  commaunde*  | 
mentes  of  |  God.  |  C  Made  dialoge  wyse  by  Ihon  Vef\ron,  in  a 
manner  word  by  ]  woorde  ;  as  he  did  set  it  |  forth  in  his  lectures  | 
at  Paules"  [London],  8",  188  unnumbered  pages.  The  second 
work  is  entitled,  "yl  FRVTEFVL  \  treatise  of  Predestinati^lon, 
and  of  the  deuyne  |  prouidence  of  god,  as  far  |  forth  as  the  holy 
scriptui|res  and  word  of  god  shal  |  lead  vs,  and  an  answer  | 
made  to  all  the  vain  and  |  blasphemous  obiections  |  that  the 
Epicures  and  |  Anabaptistes  of  our  |  time  canne  make...". 
[London],  8°,  127  unnumbered  pages. 

About  1559  or  1560  the  English  Government  seems  for 
some  reason  to  have  been  unusually  disturbed  concerning  the 
Anabaptists,  whether  on  account  of  the  publication  of  so  many 
books  against  them,  or  because  of  the  actual  spread  of  heretical 
views  of  one  kind  or  another  among  the  English  people,  it  is 
difficult  to  say.  At  any  rate  in  1560  there  was  issued  "A 
proclamation  for  the  banishment  of  Anabaptists  that  refuse  to 
be  reconciled,  22  Septembris."  One  of  them,  of  unknown  name, 
about  1559  or  1560,  seems  to  have  written  an  anonymous  work 
entitled,  "The  cofutation  of  the  errors  of  the  careles  by  necessitie", 
evidently  a  treatise  against  the  doctrine  of  Predestination. 
Whether  it  was  a  printed  book  or  only  a  manuscript  is  not  clear. 

John  Knox,  then  at  the  beginning  of  his  famous  career,  under- 
took to  answer  "  The  cofutation"  in  most  thorough  fashion,  and 
published  a  good  sized  book  in  1560  at  Geneva  against  it,  entitled, 
"AN  ANSWER  |  TO  A  GREAT  NOMBER  |  of  blasphemous 
cauillations  written  by  an  |  Anabaptist,  and  aduersarie  to  Gods 
eternal  |  Predestination.  |  AND  CONFVTED  \  By  lohn  Knox, 
minister  of  Oods  worde  \  in  Scotland,  j  Wherein  the  Author  so 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     63 

discouereth  the  craft  and  fal8ho-|de  of  that  sect,  that  the  godly 
knowing  that  error,  |  may  be  confirmed  in  the  trueth  by  the 
euident  Wor-|de  of  God.  |  [Device]  |  ...",  8°,  pp.  455.  This 
work  in  either  of  its  two  editions^  is  rare.  In  the  Preface 
Knox  says  that  he  has  recently  seen  -  "  a  book  moste  detestable 
&  blasphemous,  conteinyng  (as  it  is  intiteled,  The  confutation  of 
the  errors  of  the  careles  by  necessities)",  adding,  "with  that 
odious  name  do  they  burden  all  those  that  either  do  teach, 
ether  yet  beleue  the  doctrine  of  gods  eternall  predestination 
which  booke  written  in  the  english  tongue  doeth  contein  aswell 
the  lies  and  the  blasphemies  imagined  by  Sebastian  Castalio,  and 
laid  to  the  charge  of  that  moste  faithfull  seruant  of  God,  lohn 
Caluine  as  also  the  vane  reasons  Pighius,  Sadoletus  &  Georgius 
Siculus,  pestilent  Papistes,  &  expressed  ennemies  of  gods  free 
mercies.  The  dispitefuU  railing  of  w°  booke,  &  the  manifest 
blasphemies  in  the  same  conteined,  togither  with  the  earnest 
requests  of  som  godlie  brethren,  moued  me,  to  prepare  an 
answere  to  the  same:...". 

In  this  book  Knox  has  given  so  many  and  such  extended 
citations  from  his  opponent's  work  that  they  furnish  us  with 
a  very  complete  idea  of  what  the  anonymous  author  of  "The 
cofutation"  thought  on  the  subjects  of  election,  predestination, 
etc.,  but  since  he  apparently  wrote  nothing  concerning  baptism, 
a  subject  so  vital  to  the  real  Anabaptists,  we  hardly  need  here 
to  make  further  comment  on  Knox's  work,  though  we  could 
not  afford  wholly  to  overlook  it. 

John  Strype  says*  that  in  1560  some  Dutch  Anabaptists  who 

1  An  octavo  edition  (pp.  443)  was  printed  in  London  in  1591  probably 
to  prevent  the  English  people  from  being  infected  with  the  opinions  of  the 
Barrowists,  who  had  been  incorrectly  given  the  nickname  of  Anabaptists. 
This  is  apparently  an  unaltered  edition  of  the  text  in  so  far  as  the  wording 
is  concerned. 

2  P.  8. 

3  The  Rev.  J,  H.  Shakespeare  in  his  "Baptist  and  Congregational 
Pioneers",  London,  1906,  p.  16,  curiously  ascribes  this  work  to  John  Knox, 
though  he  may  have  intended  to  ascribe  it  to  Cooche,  but  I  know  of  no 
evidence  whatever  that  Cooche  wrote  it,  and  of  course  Knox  did  not 
write  it. 

*  "Annals  of  the  Reformation  ",  pp.  175-6. 


64  Early  English  Dissenters 

had  escaped  to  England  tried  to  be  admitted  as  members  of 
the  Dutch  church  in  London,  that  their  wish  was  not  granted, 
and  that  again  in  1564  there  arose  a  contention  in  this  church 
concerning  the  baptizing  of  infants,  but  that  then  also  Ana- 
baptist views  were  not  welcome.  To  consider  that  the  Dutch 
church  in  London  was  an  Anabaptist  congregation  at  this  time 
is,  therefore,  very  inaccurate,  and  the  present  writer  knows  of 
no  good  evidence  that  it  ever  adopted  any  Anabaptist  opinions. 
It  would  seem  that  Anabaptism  during  the  sixteenth  century 
never  appealed  strongly  to  the  English  mind.  The  name  had 
too  recently  been  associated  with  the  fall  of  Mlinster  and  with 
events  revolting  to  the  sober-minded  Englishman.  During  that 
period  one  had  to  be  an  important  personage  to  dare  to  hold 
Anabaptist  views  in  England.  Even  as  late  as  1567  "lohn 
lewel  Bishop  of  Sarisburie"  in  "A  Defence  of  the  Apologie  of  \ 
the  Churche  of  Englande,  |  ...",  said, — "  Your  Anabaptistes,  and 
Zuenkfeldians,  wee  knowe  not.  They  finde  Harbour  emongste 
you  in  Austria,  Slesia,  Morauria,  and  in  sutche  other  Countries, 
and  Citties,  where  the  Gospel  of  Christe  is  suppressed  :  but 
they  haue  no  Acquaintance  withe  vs,  neither  in  Englande,  nor 
in  Germanic,  nor  in  France,  nor  in  Scotlande,  nor  in  Denmarke, 
nor  in  Sueden,  nor  in  any  place  els,  where  the  Gospel  of  Christe 
is  clearely  preached "^  To  be  sure,  this  is  not  quite  exact  in  so 
far  at  least  as  Germany  is  concerned,  but  while  a  few  isolated 
Anabaptists  are  reported  to  have  been  in  England  at  this  period, 
there  appears  to  be  no  good  reason  for  doubting  that  the  Ana- 
baptists were  then  generally  unknown  in  this  country.  However, 
about  1576  there  seems  to  have  been  some  fear  prevalent  that 
Anabaptism  might  spread  among  the  English,  for  it  is  said  that 
in  that  year  a  book  was  published,  entitled,  "  Cuth.[bert]  Mutton 
his  confutation  of  the.  ..sect  of  Anabaptistes :  Wherein  you  may 
behold  the  perfecte  humanity  of  Christ",  S^^  About  1577  (?) 
Edmond  Bicknoll  also  published  his  rare  work  entitled,  "A 
Swoorde  against  |  swearing,  contey-lning  these  principal  | 
poyntes.  \  1    That  there  is  a  lawful  vse  of  an  |  oth,  contrary 

1  P.  30. 

2  W.  Herbert's  "Typographical  Antiquities",  etc.,  Vol.  ii.,  p.  1135.    So 
far  as  I  am  aware,  no  living  author  has  seen  this  work. 


The  Aiiahaptists  in  Eiiglaiid  before  1612     65 

to  the  assertion  of  |  the  Manichees  &  Anabaptistes.  |  2  Hotue 
great  a  sinne  it  is  to  siueare  \  falsly,  vaynely,  rashly,  or 
customahly.  \  3  That  common  or  vsuall  swearyng  leadeth  vnto 
periurie.  |  4  Examples  of  Gods  iust  and  visible  pu#'nishment 
vpon  blasphemers,...  |  IF  Imprinted  at  London  for  |  William 
Totureolde,  by  the  |  assent  o/Richard  [  VVatkins",  8°,  47  +  i  leaves, 
chiefly  in  Black  Letter.  At  least  one  other  edition  of  this  work 
may  be  found  in  the  British  Museum. 

After  1577  (?)  for  some  years  England  was  evidently  not 
especially  troubled  by  Anabaptistical  tendencies,  though  Robert 
Browne  in  1582  says^  that  he  and  his  followers  have  been  called 
"Anabaptistes"  because  of  their  attitude  towards  magistrates. 
However,  no  new  books  in  English  appear  to  have  been  written 
on  the  subject  until  1588,  after  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  had 
been  imprisoned.  Then  Dr  Robert  Some,  Master  of  Peterhouse 
at  Cambridge,  inaccurately  accused  John  Penry  of  holding 
"many  Anabaptistical,  blasphemous  and  Popish  absurdities "^ 
and  in  the  following  year,  1589,  he  seems  likewise  to  have 
included  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  among  "  the  Anabaptistical 
order  "-K 

Again  for  more  than  twenty  years  comparatively  little  was 
published  in  England  about  Anabaptists,  and  this  fact  argues 
strongly  that  they  had  as  yet  gained  no  foothold  on  English 
soil.  In  1611,  however,  there  came  upon  the  scene  one  Edward 
Wightman,  a  person  who  until  the  last  decade,  on  account  of  a 
lack  of  trustworthy  information,  has  been  much  misunderstood, 
and  has  been  commonly  termed  an  Anabaptist.  It  is  true  that 
he  held  a  few  opinions  maintained  by  the  Continental  Ana- 
baptists, but  together  with  these  he  advanced  certain  other 
remarkable  views,  which  make   it  advisable   to  consider   his 

1  See  the  Rev.  T.  G.  Crippeii's  edition  of  "  A  Treatise  of  Reformation 
without  Tarying  for  Anie",  London,  1903,  p.  27. 

2  In  "A  Defence  of  Svch  Points  in  R.  Somes  Last  Treatise,  As  M.  Peurj 
hath  dealt  against : ...",  1588,  London,  4". 

3  In  ".4  I  GODLY  TREA-iTISE,  WHEREIN  ARE  |  EXAMINED 
AND  CONFV;  I  ted  many  execrable  fancies,  giuen  out  and  |  holdeii,  partly 
by  Henri/  Barrow  and  Ioh7i  |  Greenewood :  partly,  by  other  of  the  |  Ana- 
baptistical order. ]...",  1589,  London,  -4°. 

B.  5 


66  Early  English  Dissenters 

case  in  the  discussion  of  the  English  Seekers  in  Chapter 
VIII. 

William  Sayer,  on  the  other  hand,  who  is  brought  to  our 
notice  in  1612,  may  perhaps  be  better  presented  here.  In  this 
year  he  was  imprisoned  in  "the  gaole  for  the  Countie  of 
Norff[olk]".  Like  Wightman  he  seems  to  have  denied  "the 
Godhead  of  lesus  Christe  &  of  the  holie  ghost",  but  unlike 
him  he  does  not  appear  to  have  looked  upon  himself  as  a 
prophet.  Sayer  disapproved  of  the  baptism  of  infants,  because 
they  have  no  "actuall  faithe";  he  claims  that  it  is  lawful  to 
carry  arms  and  to  fight  with  the  same  against  the  enemies  of 
"  the  Church  of  the  seperation  from  the  Church  of  England  " ; 
that  it  is  "vnlawfull  to  take  an  oath  before  any  ecclesiasticall 
officer",  or  "  to  sue  in  any  Criminall  cause,  before  an  ecclesias- 
ticall magestrate " ;  that  the  king  has  no  right  to  grant  to 
Bishops  or  priests  the  rights  of  civil  magistrates ;  and  that 
the  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England  are  not  lawfully 
called  to  their  office  since  they  are  not  called  in  scriptural 
manner. 

Sayer  was  twice  officially  examined  by  John  Jegon,  Bishop 
of  Norwich,  just  before,  or  about,  November  25,  1612.  He 
stood  firm  in  his  opinions  and  could  not  be  persuaded  to 
recant,  although  he  was  treated  "in  all  mildenesse  &  lenitie", 
and  "  Great  care  had  "  been  taken  "  for  his  better  instruccion 
by  often  conference  privately,  &  publiquely  by  learned  & 
discreete  divines." 

Sayer's  case  appears  to  have  greatly  disturbed  the  Bishop 
of  Norwich,  who  as  a  last  resort  wrote  to  Archbishop  Abbot 
concerning  it.  The  Archbishop  replied  in  a  letter  dated, 
"Lambhithe  Decemb:  j.  1612."  He  speaks  of  Sayer  as  a 
desperate  heretic,  "  who  out  of  malice  rather  then  out  of 
vnderstanding  mainteineth  manie  prophane  &  scismaticall 
opinions."  The  Bishop  of  Norwich  seems  to  have  suggested 
that  "hee  [Sayer]  should  burne  as  an  Hereticque",  but  the 
Archbishop  replies  that  such  a  severe  course  would  "  neuer 
be  assented  to"  [by  ecclesiastical  law],  unless  Sayer  should 
obstinately  persist  in  denying  the  "Godhead  of  Christe,  and 
of  the  Holie  ghoste",  in  which  case  "  the  Lawe  will  [would] 


The  Anabaptists  in  England  before  1612     67 

take  holde  of  him,  as  it  did  this  last  yeare  vpon  Legate,  and 
Wightman,  to  frie  him  at  a  Stake",  a  somewhat  jubilant 
expression,  it  would  seem,  for  Archbishop  Abbot ! 

The  present  account  is  the  first  modern  reference  to  Sayer 
that  the  author  remembers  to  have  seen.  It  would  be  in- 
teresting to  know  how  the  case  developed.  Certainly  Sayer 
was  not  "  fried  "  at  a  stake,  but  whether  he  recanted  or  not 
is  at  present  apparently  not  known.  Copies  of  the  original 
papers  from  which  the  information  concerning  this  case  has 
been  gleaned  are  given  entire  in  the  volume  of  documents. 


5—2 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  GRADUAL  GROWTH  OF  PURITANISM  AND  ITS  CON- 
TRIBUTION TO  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  ENGLISH 
SEPARATISM  UNTIL   1581 

Having  seen  that  Anabaptism  had  practically  no  influence 
on  separatism  in  England  before  1612,  we  may  now  glance  back 
at  quite  another  current  of  religious  opinion  that  began  to 
manifest  itself  shortly  after  the  commencement  of  the  English 
Reformation.  This  was  the  old  Nonconformity  which  later 
developed  into  Puritanism. 

From  the  time  of  Robert  Baillie  and  his  contemporaries 
until  comparatively  recent  years  it  has  been  the  prevailing 
custom  among  historical  writers  to  ascribe  the  rise  and  growth 
of  separatism  in  England  largely  to  the  rapid  spread  of  Con- 
tinental Anabaptism.  I  myself  formerly  held  this  opinion,  but 
it  now  appears  to  me  much  more  likely  that  the  true  source  of 
Brownism,  as  well  as  of  Barrowism,  is  to  be  found  in  the  so-called 
old  Nonconformity,  in  the  London  Protestant  congregation  of 
Queen  Mary's  time,  and  in  the  views  of  many  of  the  Marian 
exiles,  as  well  as  in  the  maturer  opinions  of  later  Puritans. 

Very  little,  I  believe,  has  as  yet  appeared  in  English  con- 
cerning the  church  organization  of  the  Continental  Anabaptists, 
but  in  one  of  the  best  German  works  thus  far  written  about 
themS  Dr  Karl  Rembert  in  a  chapter  entitled,  "  Tauferische 
Gemeindeorganization  in  Julich",  names  the  following  officials 
who  were  perhaps  usually  to  be  found  in  an  early  Continental 
Anabaptist    congregation'': — "An   der    Spitze    der    Gemeinde 

1  "  Die  '  Wiedertaufer '  im  Herzogtum  JUlich",  Berlin,  1899.  I  do  not 
always  agree  with  Dr  Rembert's  conclusions,  but  the  work  is  iu  many  ways 
highly  instructive. 

»  Ibid.,  p.  404. 


Puritanism  mid  Separatism  until  1581       69 

stand  ein  Aufseher,  der  den  Titel  '  Bischof  fiihrte.  Ihm  lag 
die  Leitung  ob;  seine  Hauptthatigkeit  bestand  im  Predigen, 
d.  h.  Auslegen  der  Schrift  und  ira  Taufen.  Zur  Seite  standen 
ihm  drei  Diaconen,  welche  die  Armen  unter  den  Briidern 
versorgten...."  It  will  readily  be  seen  that  these  officers  were 
somewhat  different  from  those  of  Brownists,  Barrowists,  and 
later  English  Anabaptists. 

As  soon  as  the  Reformation  in  England  commenced,  there 
was  naturally  considerable  interchange  of  thought  between  that 
country  and  Germany,  the  source  of  the  Reformation,  though 
Lutheran  ideas  seem  seldom  to  have  appealed  particularly  to 
the  Anglican  Church  dignitaries.  The  views  of  the  Swiss 
Reformers,  and  especially  of  Calvin,  met  with  more  apprecia- 
tion in  England.  Even  as  early  as  1536  there  was  published 
for  the  peinisal  of  the  English  people  a  pamphlet  of  fourteen 
unnumbered  octavo  pages  entitled,  "C  A  compedious  |  letter 
which  Ihon  Pomerane  [Bugenhagius]  cura?jte  of  the  congre  ! 
gationat  Wittenjberge  sent  to  the  |  faythfuU  christen  |  congre- 
gati»ion  in  En*|glande."  Of  course  this  was  not  the  only  work  of 
the  kind.  Many  Continental  books  of  Divinity  must  have  been 
brought  over  into  England  at  an  early  date,  and  their  contents 
eagerly  devoured  by  educated  Englishmen,  Sometimes  the 
acceptance  of  the  new  views  may  have  led  to  the  imprison- 
ment, banishment,  or  even  death  of  those  who  adopted  them. 
Thus  I.  B.  [John  Bale  ?]  and  "  certayne  men  susspected  of 
heresye"  may  have  been  banished  in  1547,  or  earlier. 

The  idea  of  what  may  be  termed  a  congregational  church 
did  not  originate  with  Robert  Browne.  Long  before  he 
organized  his  "  companie "  in  Norwich  there  had  been  con- 
gregational churches  in  England  of  certain  types,  but  they 
were  not  exactly  what  we  mean  by  the  expression  Congrega- 
tional Church  to-day,  a  society  of  separatists  with  a  particular 
kind  of  church  organization  ;  and  when  Robert  Browne  advanced 
his  own  opinions,  they  naturally  reflected  to  some  extent  views 
that  had  earlier  been  held  by  other  English  congregations. 

In  1553,  after  the  ten  days'  reign  of  Lady  Jane  Gray,  Queen 
Mary  came  to  the  throne.  During  Mary's  reign  the  adherents 
of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England  were  placed  in  a  most 


70  Early  English  Dissenters 

trying  position.  Only  those  who  were  willing  to  accept  Roman 
Catholicism  were  safe.  In  this  predicament  the  Reformation 
leaders  of  the  Church  of  England  and  the  people  who  sym- 
pathized with  them,  we  are  told,  were  themselves  "separated 
from  the  reste  of  the  Lande,  as  from  the  world,  and  ioyned  in 
coaenaunt,  by  voluntarie  profession  [evidently  much  as  were  the 
Scottish  Reformers  in  time  of  special  danger],  to  obey  the  trueth 
of  Christ,  and  to  witnes  against  the  abominations  of  Antichrist, 
As  they  also  did  euen  vnto  death,  in  the  trueth  which  they  sawe, 
though  otherwise  being  but  as  it  were  in  the  tiuylight  of  the 
Gospell  they  had  their  mantes  and  errors..}".  It  is  said  that 
during  Mary's  reign  several  hundred  people  fled  from  the 
country. 

There  was,  however,  a  congregation  composed  of  such 
Protestant  members  of  the  Church  of  England  that  met  in 
and  about  London  during  the  greater  part  of  her  reign.  It 
was  finally  betrayed  into  the  hands  of  Bonner,  Bishop  of 
London,  about  1557  or  1558,  by  one  Roger  Sergeant,  and  a 
very  good  idea  of  its  services,  etc.,  is  to  be  obtained  from 
John  Foxe's  "Acts  and  Monuments"^.  From  certain  depositions 
therein  contained  we  learn  that  the  English  service  as  expressed 
in  the  second  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI  was  used  by  this 
church,  which  appears  to  have  varied  in  numbers  from  twenty 
to  about  two  hundred,  and  to  have  greatly  increased  in  size 
towards  the  end  of  Mary's  reign.  On  account  of  the  danger  of 
persecution  the  congregation  did  not  often  meet  in  the  same 
locality.  It  is  known,  for  instance,  that  meetings  were  held 
"  at  Wapping  at  one  Church's  house,  hard  by  the  water  side : 
sometimes  at "  the  house  of  Alice  Warner,  a  widow  and  proprie- 
tress of  the  King's  head,  Ratcliffe;  "sometimes  at  St.  Katherine's, 
at "  the  house  of  a  Dutchman  named  Frogg,  who  was  a  shoe- 
maker;  sometimes  "at  Horseleydown,  beyond  Battle-Bridge" 

1  Cited  from  a  statement  of  Francis  Johnson's  published  in  Henry 
Jacob's  "  A  DEFENCE  |  OF  THE  CHVECHES  |  AND  MINISTRY  | 
OF  ENGLANDE...",  Middelbvrch,  1599,  p.  13. 

2  "  Fourth  Edition  :  Revised  and  Corrected  with  Appendices,  Glossary, 
and  Indices,  by  the  Rev.  Josiah  Pratt,  M.A.,...",  London  [1877?],  8", 
Vol.  vin.,  pp.  458-60,  and  558-9. 


Puritanism  and  Separatism  until  1581       71 

"  at  a  dyer's  house,  betwixt  two  butchers  there  " ;  and  sometimes 
"at  the  Swan  at  Limehouse". 

The  church  seems  to  have  come  into  existence  "  about  the 
first  entry  of  queen  Mary's  reign",  and  "had  divers  ministers; 
first,  master  Seamier,  then  Thomas  Foule,  after  him  master 
Rough,  then  master  Augustine  Bemher,  and  last  master 
Bentham... (being  now  bishop  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield),..." 
From  this  statement  it  is  clear  that  the  congregation  was 
not  composed  of  Anabaptists,  and  also  that  they  were  not 
separatists  from  the  Church  of  England  in  any  modern  sense, 
but  only  objected  to  Roman  Catholic  domination.  As  soon  as 
this  was  removed  its  pastor,  and  probably  the  people,  returned 
to  the  Church, 

As  to  the  services  of  the  congregation  Roger  Sergeant 
made  the  following  deposition : — 

Commonly  the  usage  is,  to  have  all  the  English  service  without 
any  diminishing,  wholly  as  it  was  in  the  time  of  king  Edward  the 
sixth ;  neither  praying  for  the  king  nor  the  queen ;  despising  the 
sacrament  of  the  altar,  and  the  coming  to  church,  saying  that  a 
man  cannot  come  to  the  church,  except  he  be  partaker  of  all  the 
evils  there. 

They  have  reading  and  preaching,  and  the  minister  is  a  Scotch- 
man, whose  name  he  knoweth  not ;  and  they  have  two  deacons  that 
gather  money,  which  is  distributed  to  the  prisoners  in  the  Mar- 
shalsea,  King's-bench,  Lollards'-tower,  Newgate,  and  to  the  poor 
that  come  to  the  assembly; 

Sometimes  the  assembly  beginneth  at  seven  in  the  morning,  or  at 
eight ;  sometime  at  nine ;  and  then,  or  soon  after  they  dine,  and 
tarry  till  two  of  the  clock,  and,  amonges  other  things,  they  talk 
and  make  officers. 

Evidently  some  services  were  held  "  between  nine  and 
eleven  aforenoon,  and  from  one  till  four  at  afternoon ". 

One  William  Ellerby,  tailor,  deposed,  "  that  he  hath  been  at 
the  assembly  kept  at  Ratclifi'e,  at  the  King's-head,  at  the  widow's 
house  there  ;  where  one  Coste  did  read,  in  English,  three  psalms, 
that  is  to  wit, '  Confitemini', '  Magnificat',  '  Nunc  dimittis',  upon 
a  Sunday,  after  even-song,... which  assembly  lasted  about  half 
an  hour ;  some  sitting  at  the  table,  some  standing  to  hear  the 
said  Scot,  having  three  or  four  pots  of  beer  before  the  said  Scot 
came  to  the  assembly  at  Frogg's  and  went  to  the  said  play,.,". 

In  order  to  escape  detection  the  members  of  this  church 


72  Early  English  Dissenters 

had  to  adopt  measures  of  great  precaution,  as  is  perhaps  best 
narrated  in  the  deposition  of  Mrs  Alice  Warner, — 

that  upon  a  Sunday,  six  weeks  agone,  a  certain  company  of 
Frenchmen,  Dutchmen,  and  other  strangers,  and  amongst  them 
Enghshmen,  appearing  to  be  young  merchants,  to  the  number  of  a 
score,  resorted  to  her  house  of  the  King's-head  at  RatcHfiFe  ;  re- 
questing to  have  a  pig  roasted,  and  half  a  dozen  faggots  to  be  brent. 
In  the  mean  time  the  said  company  went  into  a  back  house,  where 
they  were  two  sundry  times ;  the  first  time,  between  twelve  and 
one,  they  were  reading,  but  what,  she  cannot  tell,  whether  it  was  a 
testament  or  some  other  book  ;  and  they  tarried  there  about  two 
hours.  The  second  time  was  three  weeks  past,  upon  a  holy-day, 
about  the  middle  of  the  week  ;  at  which  time  they  repaired  to  her 
house  about  seven  o'clock  in  the  morning,  who  had  a  fire  and  bread 
and  beer  within  the  said  back  house.  And  then  this  examinate, 
going  abroad,  did  see  the  said  multitude,  and  perceived  that  they 
also  then  did  read,  but  what,  she  cannot  tell ;  and  the  said  multitude 
did  tarry  there  from  seven  till  ten  before  noon,  and,  at  their 
departure,  they  laboui'ed  to  this  examinate  that  they  might  always 
have  the  said  back  house  at  their  pleasure,  to  make  good  cheer  at 
their  repairing  thither... And  she  saith  that  her  maid  said  that  she 
judged  them  to  be  the  same  that  were  first  there ;  and  how  the  said 
multitude  called  one  another  "  brother,"  and  did  every  one,  to  his 
liability,  cast  down  upon  the  table  money,  which  was  two  pence  a 
piece.  And  this  examinate  saith,  that  she  asked  one  of  the  said 
multitude,  how  the  said  money  was  disposed  :  answer  being  to  her 
by  him  given,  that  it  was  to  the  use  and  relief  of  the  poor.  And 
this  examinate  thinketh  it  was  a  Frenchman,  or  some  other  out- 
landishman,  because  he  spake  evil  English. 

Among  the  narrow  escapes  from  capture  experienced  by  the 
members  of  this  congregation,  the  following  are  especially 
mentioned : — 

First,  at  the  Black-friars,  when  they  should  have  resorted  to 
sir  Thomas  Garden's  house, . . . 

Again,... about  Aldgate,  where  spies  were  laid  for  them  ;  and 
had  not  Thomas  Simson  the  deacon  espied  them,  and  bid  them 
disperse  themselves  away,  they  had  been  taken... 

Another  time  also,  about  the  great  Conduit,  they,  passing 
there  through  a  very  strait  alley  into  a  clothworker's  loft,  were 
espied,... 

Another  like  escape  they  made  in  a  ship  at  Billingsgate, 
belonging  to  a  certain  good  man  of  Ley,  where  in  the  open  sight 
of  the  people  they  were  congregated   together,  and  yet... escaped. 

Betwixt  Ratcliffe  and  Rotherhithe,  in  a  ship  called  Jesus 
ship,  twice  or  thrice  they  assembled,  having  there  closely,  after  their 
accustomed  inanner,  both  sermon,  prayer,  and  communion;... 


Puritanism  and  Sepa^^atisni  iintil  1681       73 

Moreover,  in  a  cooper's  house  in  Pudding-lane, . . . 

But  they  never  escaped  more  hardly,  than  once  in  Thames- 
street  in  the  night-time,  where  the  house  being  beset  with  enemies, 
yet, ...they  were  delivered  by  the  means  of  a  mariner,  who  being 
at  that  present  in  the  same  company,  and  seeing  no  other  way  to 
avoid,  plucked  off  his  slops  and  swam  to  the  next  boat,  and  so  rowed 
the  company  over,  using  his  shoes  instead  of  oars ;  and  so  the 
jeopardy  was  despatched. 

At  Stoke  in  Suffolk  there  appears  to  have  been  a  similar 
congregation^  in  or  about  1558.  These  people  were  chiefly 
women,  but  there  "were  many",  we  are  told,  who  seem  to 
have  covenanted  by  "  giving  their  hands  together",  and  to 
have  concluded  "  by  promise  one  to  another,  that  they  would 
not  receive  [the  Mass]  at  all."  To  escape  danger  they  finally 
fled  to  a  place  of  safety.  Of  course  it  is  undei*stood  that  this 
congi-egation  like  that  in  London  was  composed  of  members  of 
the  Church  of  England  who  separated  only  from  the  Roman 
Catholic  domination,  and  that  it  probably  had  no  fixed  or 
settled  form  of  organization ;  but  later  reformers  like  Browne 
must  have  been  aware  of  the  proceedings  of  these  earlier 
congregations  whose  existence  and  experiences  had  become 
known  through  the  first  (Latin)  edition  of  Foxe's  great  work. 

Of  the  English  congregations  on  the  Continent  during 
Queen  Mary's  reign  that  with  the  affairs  of  which  we  are 
best  acquainted  was  at  Frankfort  on  the  Main.  A  record  of 
its  troubles^  was  first  published  in  1574,  twenty  years  after 
the  events  described  occurred.  Nevertheless,  the  story  is  told 
with  great  fulness  and  vividness,  a  record  of  discord  and  con- 
tention such  as  has  seldom  been  depicted  in  the  literature  of 
modern  church  history.  In  fact,  the  quarrels  in  this  congrega- 
tion seem  equal  to,  if  not  worse  than,  the  troubles  in  Robert 
Browne's  congregation  in  Middelburg,  or  the  petty  wrangling 
between  George  and  Francis  Johnson  in  the  congregation  at 

*  See  Rev.  Josiah  Pratt's  fourth  edition  of  "  The  Acts  and  Monuments 
of  John  Foxe  "  [1877  ?],  8°,  Vol.  viii.,  pp.  556-7. 

"^  A  Brieft' discours  |  off  the  troubles  begonne  at  Franck  |  ford  in  Germany 
Anno  Domini  1554.  Abowte  |  the  Booke  off  oft'  [sic]  common  prayer  and 
Ceremonies /and  conti;|nued  by  the  Euglishe  men  theyre/to  thende  off 
Q.  Maries  |  Raigne /...",  1674,  4°,  pp.  ii,  ccxv,  i. 


74  Early  English  Dissenters 

Amsterdam.  It  appears  that  four  companies  of  exiles  with 
their  ministers  arrived  at  Frankfort  on  June  17,  1554,  and 
about  a  month  later  were  granted  permission  to  meet  in  the 
church  used  by  the  French  congregation.  In  order  that  the 
service  might  not  be  too  divergent  from  that  of  the  French, 
responses  to  the  Minister's  reading,  the  litany,  use  of  the  sur- 
plice, "  and  many  other  thinges  "  that  would  seem  "  more  then 
strange"  to  the  Continental  reformed  churches,  were  omitted. 
In  place  of  the  English  Confession  the  minister  was  to  use  one 
"off  more  effecte".  After  the  Confession  the  people  were  "to 
singe  a  psalme  in  meetre  in  a  plaine  tune",  and  then  after  the 
minister  had  prayed  "for  thassistance  off  gods  holie  spirite", 
he  was  "to  proceade  to  the  sermon".  "After  the  sermon  /  a 
generall  praier  for  all  estates  and  for  our  countrie  of  Englande 
was  also  deuised  /  at  thende  off  whiche  praier  /  was  ioined  the 
lords  praier  and  a  rehersall  off  tharticles  off  oure  belieff  /  whiche 
ended  the  people  "  are  "  to  singe  and  [sic]  other  psalme  as  afore. 
Then  the  minister  pronouncinge  his  blessinge  The  peace  off 
god  /  &c.  or  some  other  off  like  effecte  /  the  people  "  are  "  to 
departe". 

And  as  touchinge  the  ministration  off  the  Sacraments  sundrie 
things  were  also  by  common  consents  omitted  /  as  superstitious  and 
superfluous.  After  that  the  congregation  had  thus  concluded  and 
agreed  /  and  had  chosen  their  minister  and  Deacons  to  serue  for 
a  time  :  they  entred  their  churche  the  29.  off  the  same  monethe 

[July] And  for  that  it  was  thought  the  churche  coulde  not  longe 

contynewe  in  good  order  withowte  discipline  /  there  was  also  a 
brieff  forme  deuised  /  declaringe  the  necessitie  /  the  causes  /  and  the 
order  theroff  /  whereunto  all  those  that  were  present  subscribed  / 
shewinge  therby  that  they  were  ready  and  willinge  to  submitt 
themselues  to  the  same  /  accordinge  to  the  rule  prescribed  in  gods 
holie  word  /  at  whiche  time  it  was  determined  by  the  congregation 
that  all  suche  as  shulde  come  after  /  shulde  doo  the  like  /  before  they 
were  admitted  as  members  off  that  churched 

But  some  of  those  who  subsequently  came  to  Frankfort  were 
more  in  favour  of  the  service  of  the  second  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  used  at  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Edward  VI  and  accord- 
ingly stirred  up  discord.  Both  parties  finally  agreed  to  submit 
the  dispute  to  "  5.  notable  men  /  Calvin  /  Musculus  /  Martir  / 

1  "A  BrieflF  discours  |  off  the  troubles...",  pp.  7-8. 


Puritanism  and  Separatism  until  1581       75 

Bullinger  /  and  Viret."  "  This  condition  was  willingly  accepted  / 
and  the  couenaunte  rated  on  bothe  partes.  A  writinge  was  also 
therofF  to  testifie  the  promesse  made  off  the  one  to  the  other. 
Moreouer  thanks  were  geuen  to  god  withe  great  ioye  /  and 
common  praiers  were  made  /  for  that  men  thought  that  daie 
to  be  thende  ofif  discorde.  Besides  this  /  they  receyued  /  the 
communion  as  the  sure  token  /  or  seale  off  their  mutuall 
agremente  /  ...^". 

Still  the  troubles  continued  and  on  the  "  laste  off  Feb.", 
"1557"  (Old  Style)  the  Magistrate  had  to  intervene,  "and 
tooke  order  that  all  former  offences  shulde  be  vtterly  extincte 
and  buried  in  the  graue  off  forgetfulnes.  Wheruppon  at  the 
commaundement  /  and  in  the  presence  off  this  Magistrate  /  the 
parties  ioined  handes  together  in  token  that  they  were  reconciled 
and  were  Good  frinds  and  lovers...'^".  So  by  March  30  the  new 
form  of  discipline  had  been  subscribed  by  forty-two  out  of  a 
total  membership  of  sixty-two,  but  shortly  after  fresh  troubles 
of  a  still  more  trying  nature  broke  out.  However,  the  election 
of  officers  under  the  "  new  discipline  "  was  at  length  completed, 
and  resulted  in  the  choice  of  two  ministers,  six  "Seniors"  or 
elders,  and  four  deacons. 

For  our  purposes  the  articles  in  the  old  and  new  "Disciplines" 
concerning  the  admission  of  church  members  are  of  interest.  In 
the  "  olde  discipline  "  the  section  on  this  subject  reads  thus^ : — 

The  manner  off  receiuinge  off  all  solutes  off 
personnes  into  the  saide  congre-- 
gation. 
Fyrste  /  everie  one  aswell  man  as  woman  which  desireth  to  be 

'  Ibid.,  p.  41.  This  is  an  interesting  passage,  as  it  may  suggest  the  origin 
of  the  use  of  church  covenants  among  later  separatists.  It  is  thus  possible 
that  they  did  not  at  first  employ  such  covenants  because  they  were  used  in 
the  Apostolic  or  post- Apostolic  churches,  or  even  because  they  thought 
that  the  use  of  covenants  was  enjoined  in  the  Bible.  At  any  rate,  this 
church  covenant  appears  to  have  been  nothing  more  than  a  compact 
between  two  parties  in  the  congregation  for  settling  past  diflBculties,  and 
for  making  future  disagreements  between  the  members  less  likely. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  87.  In  a  somewhat  similar  manner  Henry  Jacob's  In- 
dependent Puritan  congregation  in  London  was  organized  in  1616. 

3  Ibid.,^.  111. 


76  Early  English  Dissenters 

receyued  shall  make  a  declaration  or  Confession  off  their  faithe  / 
before  the  pastor  and  Seniors  shewinge  hiniselff  fully  to  consent  and 
agree  with  the  doctrine  of  the  churche  and  submittinge  themselues 
to  the  discipline  off  the  same. 

The  corresponding  section  of  the  "  new  discipline  "  is  prac- 
tically identical,  with  the  exception  of  the  addition  of  the 
following  words  at  the  close,  "and  the  same  to  testifie  by 
subscribing  therto  yf  they  can  wryte".  It  is  also  to  be  noticed 
that  in  the  "  new  discipline  "  the  final  power  is  reserved  in  the 
hands  of  the  people  and  not  of  the  ministers  and  elders. 

These  early  Nonconformists,  like  the  later  Puritans,  and  like 
Robert  Browne,  evidently  did  not  believe  in  addressing  questions 
in  baptism  to  infants,  who  could  not  think  or  speak,  or  in  God- 
fathers and  Godmothers.  From  this  account  we  also  learn  that 
in  Queen  Mary's  time  the  German  churches  approved  of  having 
one  minister  in  a  congregation  superior  in  authority  to  any 
others,  that  Calvin  advocated  two  of  equal  authority  in  each 
congregation,  and  that  the  Dutch  church  at  Emden  had  three 
ministers  all  of  equal  authority.  There  were  other  English 
congregations  in  various  Continental  cities  during  Mary's  reign, 
as  at  "Arrowe"  [Aarau]  under  Mr  Leaver,  at  "  Strausburgh  / 
Zurick  /  Densbrugh  /  and  Emden",  Basel,  Wesel,  Marburg  on 
the  Lahn,  and  Geneva.  There  also  seems  to  have  been  one  at 
Wittenberg. 

The  church  at  Frankfort  on  the  Main,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  made  use  of  an  idea  slightly  suggesting  the  church 
covenant  idea  of  modern  times,  but  it  is  much  more  plainly 
manifested  among  the  English  exiles  who  published  their 
Confession  of  Faith  at  Wittenberg  in  1554  under  the  title, 
"  ;^  THE  HVMBLE  |  and  vnfamed  confessio  |  of  the  belefe 
of  certain  poore  banished  |  men,  grounded  vpon  the  holy  Scrip^j 
tures  of  God,  and  vpo  the  Articles  of  |  that  vndefiled  and 
onlye  vndoubt[edly  ?]  |  true  Christian  faith,  which  [?  the  ons]  |  ly 
Catholicke  (that  is  to  say  vni#|uersal)  Churche  of  Christ  | 
professeth.  |  C  Specially  concerning,  not  only  the  |  worde  of 
God,  and  the  ministerye  |  of  the  same  :  but  also  the  Church  |  and 
Sacramentes  |  thereof.  |  Which  we  send  moost  humbly  vnjto 
the  Lordes  of  Englad,  and  al  |  the  commons  of  the  same.  |  ..." 


Pu7'itanis7n  atid  Separatism  until  1581       77 

[Colophon.]  "C  From  Wittonburge  by  Nicholas  |  Dorcaster. 
Ann.  M.D.Iiiii.  |  [?  t]he  xiiii.  of  May." 

This  is  an  important  work^  and  will  repay  examination. 
The  Sacraments  are  defined  "as  snbstancial  couenauntes  & 
agrementes,  whose  nature  is  to  declare  vnto  vs,  some  righte, 
title,  priuiledge  or  gifte,  that  we  haue  or  shal  receiue 
thereby :..."" 

The  resemblance  of  a  church  covenant  to  a  legal  document 
is  suggested  in  the  following  passage,  which  gives  also  an 
unusually  clear  presentation  of  the  fundamental  principle  of 
such  a  covenant : — 

In  Ciuile  causes  the  like  order  taketh  place.  Where  a  leace  is 
made,  it  must  not  only  be  signed,  sealed,  &  deliuered,  but  also 
receiued,  and  the  partie  put  in  possession  :  Not  deliuered  (I  say)  by 
euery  man,  but  only  by  hym  or  his  deputie,  that  hath  authority  to 
make  or  geue  the  leace :  neither  maye  euery  man  receiue  and 
ennioye  it,  saue  only  he,  to  whom  it  is  made  or  geuen,  or  that  hath 
ryght  thereto.  Agayne,  a  leace  commonly  is  not  made  wythout 
condicions  :  whych  if  they  be  broken,  doth  not  y'^  farmer  then  forfeit 
his  leace  1 

And  what  meane  we  els  by  thys,  but  euen  to  shew  that  it  is  an 
horrible  thing,  &  farre  out  of  order,  that  whyle  the  Lord  in  this  hys 
holy  Sacrament  [of  the  Lord's  Supper]  offreth  vs  so  large  a  coue- 
naunt  of  mercy,  we  shal  thincke  scorne,  to  kepe  the  condicions 
therof,  and  the  rules  that  he  hath  prescribed  vnto  vs.  No  man 
doubtles  (no  not  in  Ciuile  matters)  would  be  so  serued  :  wher  like 
as  it  is  no  bargaine,  till  both  parties  be  agreed,  so  cometh  it  to  no 
perfect  effecte,  neither  can  it  stand  vnlesse  the  duties,  condicions  & 
promises  be  kept.  Neuertheless  this  thing  shal  appeare  muche 
more  euident,  if  we  compare  the  practise  of  these  pi-esent  miserable 
dayes,  to  the  order  of  the  Lord  and  his  Apostles  in  the  primitiue 
church,  &  lay  the  one  agaynst  the  other.  As  for  the  perfourmaunce 
of  the  condicions  on  hys  party,  ther  is  no  doubt :  For  wher  as  he 
couenanteth  with  vs  in  thys  holy  Sacrament,  so  to  feede,  nourish, 
&  comfort  our  consciences,  that  he  wyl  euen  scale  vs  vnto  him  selfe, 
set  hys  marke  vpon  vs,  and  take  vs  for  hys  own.  He  certifieth  vs 
assuredly,  that  vpon  such  condicions,  as  we  also  vpon  our  allegiaunce, 
are  bound  to  kepe  (whych  we  must  either  do,  or  els  become  vn- 
worthy  Receauers  to  our  damnation)  we  haue  felowship  with  him, 

*  It  is  not  an  Anabaptist  book  as  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Shakespeare,  in  his 
work  "  Baptist  and  Congregational  Pioneers  ",  pp.  37-8,  mistakenly  quotes 
the  present  writer  as  claiming. 

2  P.  54. 


78  Early  English  Dissenters 

and  are  partakers  of  the  same  eternall  lyfe,  that  he  hym  selfe  hath 
purchased  for  vs  in  hys  body  and  bloud  \ 

It  was  not  until  after  Queen  Mary's  death  that  Noncon- 
formists began  to  secure  a  foothold  in  England.  In  the  year 
1561  appeared  two  works  of  great  importance,  as  indicating  the 
views  with  which  many  thoughtful  Englishmen  of  Nonconformist 
inclination  must  have  become  acquainted  during  the  next  twenty 
or  thirty  years.  Both  were  printed  at  London.  One  of  them 
was  published  "according  to  the  Queenes  Maiesties  Iniunctions", 
and  was  entitled :  "  The  Confession  of  the  |  Faythe  and  Doctrine  | 
beleued  and  professed,  by  the  Pro*  |  testantes  of  the  Realme  of 
Scotlande,  |  exhibited  to  the  estates  of  the  same  |  in  parliament, 
and  by  their  pub*|licke  voices  authorised  as  a  |  doctrine, 
grounded  vpon  |  the  infallible  worde  |  of  God."  The  other  is 
entitled  "A  CONFES-|siow  of  Fayth,  made  \  by  common  con- 
sent j  of  diuers  reformed  |  Churches  beyonde  |  the  Seas :  with  I 
an  I  Exhortation  to  |  the  Reformation  of  |  the  Churche ".  It 
contains  the  following  significant  paragraphs^: — 

29  As  concerning  the  true  Churche,  we  beleue  that  it  ought 
to  be  gouerned,  accordyng  to  the  policie,  that  our  sauiour  lesus  Christ 
hath  established  :  that  is :  that  there  bee  Pastours,  Superintendes, 
and  Deacons,  to  thende  that  the  puritie  of  the  doctrine  maye  haue 
his  course,  that  vices  maie  bee  corrected  and  repressed,  and  that  the 
poore  and  afflicted  maie  bee  succoured  in  their  necessities  :  and  that 
the  assemblies  maie  bee  made,  in  the  name  of  God,  wherein  bothe 
greate  and  small  maie  be  edified 

30.  We  beleue,  that  al  true  pastours,  in  what  place  so  euer 
they  be,  haue  equal  power  and  aucthoritie  vnder  one  onely 
soueraigne  and  onely  vniuersall  bishop  lesus  Christ :  and  for  this 
cause,  that  no  Churche  oughte  to  pretend  any  rule  or  Lordship  ouer 
other. 

31.  We  beleue  that  none  ought  of  his  owns  authoritie  to 
thrust  himselfe  into  the  gouernement  of  the  church,  but  that  it 
ought  to  be  done  by  election,  for  that  it  is  possible,  and  God  per- 
mitteth  it. 

When  the  Marian  exiles  returned  to  England  they  naturally 
hoped  that  their  views  might  be  well  received,  but  they  found 
society,  and  especially  the  Church,  in  a  state  of  upheaval,  and 
unwilling  to  give  attention  to  any  further  changes  in  religious 

*  ".^A?  THE  HVMBLE  |  and  vnfamed  confessiS  |  ..."  [1554],  p.  60. 
2  Fol.  109. 


Puritanism  mid  Separatism  imtil  1581       79 

worship.  In  spite  of  the  new  Act  of  Uniformity,  however, 
Nonconformity  was  for  some  time  prevalent,  but  "in  March 
1565,  to  make  matters  more  secure,  all  the  archbishop's  licenses 
of  preachers  were  called  in,  and  licenses  were  granted  only  to 
such  as  proved  conformable  and  amenable.  This,  following 
upon  the  defeat  of  the  champions  [Sampson  and  Humphrey], 
was  a  paralysing  blow  to  those  whose  religion  centred  round 
sermons  from  puritan  [Nonconformist]  divines,  and  who  felt 
bound  in  conscience  to  abstain  from  worship  where  the  surplice 
was  worn.  To  some  of  them  this  tyranny  recalled  the  evil  days 
of  Mary;  and  remembering  how  then  they  had  braved  the 
authorities  and  met  in  secret  in  the  heart  of  London  itself,  they 
began  to  do  the  same  again,  with  the  important  difference  that 
for  their  service  they  betook  themselves  not  to  the  prayer-book 
but  to  the  Genevan  Order,  a  set  of  directions  in  outline  for  the 
conduct  of  services,  which  had  been  printed  in  English  in  1550"^ 
It  cannot  have  been  long  after  March,  1565,  that  the 
Nonconformist  ministers  who  had  lost  their  licenses  to  preach 
began  to  try  to  find  a  way  out  of  their  difficulties.  About 
this  time  (1566  ?)  the  name  Puritan  first  appears  in  English 
literature.  Bishop  Grindal  in  a  letter  to  Henry  Bullinger, 
dated  London,  Aug.  27,  1566,  says:  "It  is  scarcely  credible 
how  much  this  controversy  about  things  of  no  importance 
[i.e.,  the  vestments,  etc.]  has  disturbed  our  churches,  and  still, 
in  great  measure,  continues  to  do.  Many  of  the  more  learned 
clergy  seemed  to  be  on  the  point  of  forsaking  their  ministry. 
Many  of  the  people  also  had  it  in  contemplation  to  withdraw 
from  us,  and  set  up  private  meetings ;  but  however  most  of 
them,  through  the  mercy  of  the  Lord,  have  now  returned  to 
a  better  mind"^  Perhaps  some  such  private  assemblies  were 
actually  held  as  early  as  this,  although  such  procedure  was  no 
doubt  extremely  dangerous.     Says  Dr  R.  W.  Dixon*: — "Soon 

>  W.  H.  Frere's  "  The  English  Church  in  the  Reigns  of  EUzabeth  and 
James  I  (1558-1625) ",  London,  1904,  8°,  p.  127. 

2  "The  Zurich  Letters  "  (Parker  Society  [Vol.  vii.,  first  series]),  Cam- 
bridge, 1842,  p.  168. 

3  "  History  of  the  Church  of  England",  Oxford,  1902,  Vol.  vi.,  p.  166. 
Unfortunately,  Dr  Dixon  does  not  give  his  source  for  this  information, 
and  as  yet  I  have  been  unable  to  discover  it. 


80  Early  English  Dissenter's 

they  [the  Nonconformists]  began  to  gather  in  larger  numbers, 
and  drew  the  attention  of  the  authorities.  A  congregation, 
with  Richard  Fitz  their  minister,  was  surprised  in  the  middle 
of  this  year  (1567)  and  committed  to  Bridewell."  "About  a 
month  later",  that  is,  on  June  19,  a  congregation  of  Noncon- 
formists or  Puritans,  "to  the  number  of  a  hundred",  was  dis- 
covered holding  a  private  meeting  at  Plumbers'  Hall,  London, 
under  the  guise  of  a  wedding.  Seventeen  or  eighteen  were 
taken  prisoners  and  sent  to  the  Counter.  On  the  following 
day  seven  of  the  leading  men  appeared  before  the  Lord  Mayor, 
the  Bishop  of  London,  the  Dean  of  Westminster,  and  "  other 
Commissioners  "^  They  were  "lohn  Smith,  William  Nyxson, 
William  Wh.[ite,  or  Wight],  lames  Irelande,  Robert  Hawkins, 
Thomas  Bowelande  [not  Rowelande,  as  given  by  Dr  Waddington 
and  recently  repeated  by  Dr  Dale]  and  Richard  Morecrafte"^. 
After  their  examination  Dr  Dixon  thinks  they  were  imprisoned 
in  Bridewell,  whither,  as  has  already  been  stated,  Fitz  and  his 
company  appear  previously  to  have  been  sent. 

Besides  the  account  of  the  examination  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Plumbers'  Hall  society  contained  in  "A  parte  of  a  register",  one 
of  the  earliest  definite  statements  concerning  the  congregation 
seems  to  be  a  reference  in  the  well-known  letter  of  Bishop 
Grindal  to  Henry  Bullinger,  dated  London,  June  11  (Latin 
text,  June  9),  1568.     The  passage  reads  as  follows: — 

Our  controversy  concerning  the  habits,  about  which  you  write, 
had  cooled  down  for  a  time,  but  broke  out  again  last  winter  ;  and 
this  by  the  means  of  some  who  are  more  zealous  than  they  are 
either  learned  or  gifted  with  pious  discretion.  Some  London 
citizens  of  the  lowest  order,  together  with  four  or  five  ministers, 
remarkable  neither  for  their  judgment  nor  learning,  have  openly 
separated  from  us ;  and  sometimes  in  private  houses,  sometimes  in 
the  fields,  and  occasionally  even  in  ships,  they  have  held  their 
meetings  and  administered  the  sacraments.  Besides  this,  they 
have  ordained  ministers,  elders,  and  deacons,  after  their  own  way, 
and  have  even  excommunicated  some  who  had  seceded  from  their 
church.      And   because   masters    Laurence    Humphrey,    Sampson, 

*  "A  parte  of  a  register",  p.  23  +  ,  but  only  the  Dean  and  the  Bishop 
were  Ecclesiastical  Commissioners,  as  stated  by  Dr  Dixon  in  a  note. 

2  Ibid.  See  also  "The  Remains  of  Edmund  Grindal,  D.D.",  Parker 
Society,  1843,  pp.  201-16. 


Puritanism  arid  Separatism  until  1581       81 

Lever,  and  others,  who  have  suffered  so  much  to  obtain  liberty  in 
respect  of  things  indififerent,  will  not  unite  with  them,  they  now 
regard  them  as  semi-papists,  and  will  not  allow  their  followers  to 
attend  their  preaching^  The  number  of  this  sect  is  about  two 
hundred,  but  consisting  of  more  women  than  men.  The  privy 
council  have  lately  committed  the  heads  of  this  faction  to  prison, 
and  are  using  every  means  to  put  a  timely  stop  to  this  sect". 

From  this  citation  it  seems  that  after  a  temporary  lull 
(possibly  caused  by  the  discovery  of  Richard  Fitz's  church,  as 
well  as  of  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  in  the  summer  of 
1567  and  the  imprisonment  of  their  leaders)  the  controversy 
concerning  the  vestments  broke  out  again.  Bishop  Grindal's 
letter  does  not  make  it  clear  through  whose  instrumentality 
this  occurred,  but  a  manuscript  list  (first  discovered  and 
examined  by  Dr  Powicke  several  years  ago  in  the  Public  Record 
Office^),  the  rearranged  contents  of  which  were  published  by 
him  in  an  article  entitled,  "  Lists  of  the  Early  Separatists  "S 
makes  that  point  perfectly  plain.  A  copy  of  this  worn  and 
faded  list  is  given,  just  as  it  stands,  in  the  volume  of  docu- 
ments. After  a  time  the  Plumbers'  Hall  prisoners  had  been 
set  free.  As  long  as  they  remained  in  prison  quiet  had 
evidently  reigned,  but  soon  after  their  release  secret  meetings 
again  began  to  be  held,  and  on  March  4, 156|,  seventy- two  men 
and  women  were  found  in  the  house  of  James  Tynne,  gold- 
smith, within  the  parish  of  St  Martin's-in-the-Fields.  Among 
those  taken  were  six  of  the  first  seven  Plumbers'  Hall  leaders, 
while  one  of  their  number,  Robert  Hawkins,  seems  to  have  been 

*  This  sentence  does  not  in  any  way  prove  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall  con- 
gregation was  truly  separatist,  for  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  its  members 
did  not  separate  from  the  State  Church  on  the  ground  that  the  very  con- 
ception of  such  a  Church  was  fundamentally  false,  but  only  retired  from  it 
temporarily  in  order  to  avoid  popish  corruptions  in  the  Church,  which 
might,  they  felt,  be  noticed  even  at  the  preaching  of  such  good  men  as 
Humphrey,  Sampson,  and  Lever.  These  corruptions  they  hoped  would 
soon  be  removed  to  their  satisfaction. 

2  "Zurich  Letters"  (Parker  Society,  first  series,  Vol.  vii.),  pp.  201-2; 
Latin  text  at  the  end  of  the  volume,  p.  119. 

3  S.  P.  Dom.,  Eliz.,  xlvi  (46). 

*  In  the  "Transactions"  of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society 
(Vol.  I.,  pp.  141-158). 

B.  6 


82  Early  English  Dissenters 

retained  until  April  22,  1569,  or  after  his  release  to  have  been 
retaken  at  another  time  before  that  date.  Of  those  taken  on 
March  4,  156|,  eleven  men  and  several  unnamed  women  were 
either  retained,  or  released  and  again  imprisoned,  while  the  rest, 
with  the  possible  exception  of  Randall  Partridge  of  Old  Fish 
Street,  were  apparently  set  at  liberty.  Partridge,  as  we  shall 
learn  later,  became  a  separatist.  Finally,  on  April  22,  1569, 
twenty-four  men,  eleven  of  whose  names  appear  to  be  new,  and 
the  seven  previously  mentioned  unnamed  women,  were  freed 
by  Grindal.  In  the  list  of  men  released  on  this  last  mentioned 
date  are  found  the  names  of  all  the  first  seven  Plumbers'  Hall 
leaders  except  that  of  Richard  Morecraft.  The  list  is  given  in 
full  in  the  volume  of  documents,  together  with  a  promise  to 
conform  made  by  the  Puritan  preacher,  William  Bonham,  who 
with  Nicholas  Crane  had  been  one  of  their  ministers^ 

The  question  whether  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  was 
truly  separatist  or  not,  is  one  of  some  delicacy,  though  I  think 
it  can  now  be  definitely  answered.  In  the  first  place,  it  should 
be  said  that  Daniel  Neal  regarded  this  congregation  not  as 
separatist,  but  as  Puritan,  nor  do  any  of  the  best  historians  of 
the  Church  of  England,  whose  works  the  author  has  examined, 
consider  it  a  separatist  church.  Dr  Waddington  even  seems 
not  to  have  done  so,  but  to  have  difi'erentiated  between  the 
Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  and  that  of  Richard  Fitz.  Dr 
Powicke,  however,  has  taken  the  view  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall 
congregation  and  Fitz's  were  one  and  the  same,  and  Dr  Dale 
has  followed  him.  A  careful  examination  of  the  previously 
mentioned  citation  from  Archbishop  Grindal's  letter,  the  date 
of  the  English  text  of  which  is  June  11, 1568,  and  of  the  various 
manuscripts  relating  to  the  subject,  convinces  me  that  Dr 
Powicke  and  Dr  Dale  have  herein  been  misled. 

As  a  further  proof  of  this  contention  that  the  Plumbers' 
Hall  society  was  not  composed  of  separatists,  we  find  Dr 
Powicke   himself  admitting*  that   the  two   preachers  of  the 

^  See   "  The   Remains   of  Edmund  Grindal,   D.D.",   Parker  Society, 
1843,  pp.  316-19. 

2  See  "  Lists  of  the  Early  Separatists",  pp.  144  and  147. 


Puritanism  and  Sejjaratism  until  1581       83 

congregation,  William  Bonham^  and  Nicholas  Crane,  were 
Puritans,  not  separatists,  at  this  time,  and  that  both  of  them 
were  concerned  in  the  Presbyterian  movement  of  1572.  Re- 
membering these  facts  and  the  lack  of  sympathy,  as  Avell  as 
the  fierce  opposition,  which  the  older  Puritans  constantly 
manifested  towards  separatism,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  believe 
that  such  preachers,  as  long  as  they  remained  Puritans,  could 
have  become  the  ministers  of  a  separatist  church.  We  justly 
conclude,  therefore,  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  was 
composed  of  Puritans,  and  that  it  did  not  truly  separate  from 
the  Church  of  England  ^ 

As  the  previously  mentioned  citation  from  Grindal's  letter, 
however,  at  first  sight  appears  so  opposed  to  this  view,  we  will 
examine  it  more  carefully.  Grindal  there,  to  be  sure,  as  far  as 
mere  words  are  concerned,  says  plainly  enough  of  the  members 
of  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation,  that  they  "  have  [had] 
openly  separated  from  us ;  and  sometimes  in  private  houses, 
sometimes  in  the  fields,  and  occasionally  even  in  ships,  they 
have  [had]  held  their  meetings  and  administered  the  sacra- 
ments...have  [had]  ordained  ministers,  elders,  and  deacons, 
after  their  own  way,  and  have  [had]  even  excommunicated 
some  who  had  seceded  from  their  church."  If  this  were  all 
the  evidence  on  this  point,  we  would  not  find  it  difficult  to 
conclude  at  once  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  was 
truly  separatist,  but  as  we  have  already  seen,  there  is  over- 

^  On  May  1, 1569,  just  after  the  release  of  the  Plumbers'  Hall  prisoners 
"  William  Bonam  precher  "  was  brought  before  Mr  Thomas  Hinck,  Vicar- 
General  of  Bishop  Grindal,  and  compelled  to  promise  that  he  would  not  be 
present  at,  or  preach  before,  any  private  assemblies  contrary  to  the 
established  religion.  The  text  of  his  promise  is  given  in  full  among 
the  papers  relating  to  Kichard  Fitz's  congregation  in  the  volume  of  docu- 
ments.    Bonham,  of  course,  was  a  Puritan,  not  a  separatist. 

^  The  ablest  historians  of  the  Church  of  England  appear  to  be 
unanimous  on  this  point,  as  has  been  said  in  the  text,  nor,  in  my 
opinion,  is  their  conclusion  on  this  point  in  any  way  invalidated  by  the 
fact  that  they  make  little  or  no  reference  to  the  separatist  "Privy  Church  " 
of  Eichard  Fitz.  Dr  R.  W.  Dixon  ("  History  of  the  Church  of  England", 
Oxford,  1902,  Vol.  vi.,  p.  177)  well  says  that  these  early  Puritans  of  the 
Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  "  had  no  more  notion  than  Sampson  and  Lever 
of  separating  from  the  Church  "  of  England. 

6—2 


84  Early  English  Dissenters 

whelming  testimony  to  the  contrary,  and  it  should  further  be 
remembered  that  all  the  activities  mentioned  in  this  letter, 
even  including  such  ordinations,  could  have  taken  place  without 
separation.  In  fact,  in  the  later  independent,  non -separatist, 
Puritan  congregations  on  the  Continent  ministers  were  thus  re- 
ordained.  To  Grindal,  indeed,  Puritan  independency  must 
have  seemed  as  near  a  state  of  separation  as  he  could  well 
imagine,  but  in  the  light  of  all  the  facts  known  to-day  it  is 
sufficiently  evident  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation,  as  a 
whole,  was  in  reality  only  an  independent  Puritan  congre- 
gation modelled  after  the  London  Nonconformist  congregation 
of  Queen  Mary's  days,  which  did  not  separate  from  the 
Church  of  England  as  a  State  Church  but  merely  from  Roman 
Catholicism  in  the  Church.  Further,  this  Plumbers'  Hall 
congregation  of  1567,  it  will  be  noticed,  used  the  Genevan 
Order  of  service,  as  the  congregation  in  Queen  Mary's  time  had 
used  the  second  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI,  and  therefore  like 
it  was  not  a  Congregational,  or  separatist,  church  in  the  modem 
sense. 

Some  of  the  meetings  of  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation, 
as  suggested  in  a  note  by  Dr  Dixon ^,  are  without  doubt 
mentioned  in  the  following  passage  from  John  Stowe's  "  Memo- 
randa^" under  the  date  1567,  i.e.,  156|,  where  one  congregation 
which  met  in  different  places  appears  to  be  spoken  of  as  many 
congregations  (=  meetings  of  one  congregation  ?)  : — 

About  that  tyme  were  many  congregations  of  the  Anabaptysts  in 
London,  who  caw  1yd  themselvs  Puritans  or  Unspottyd  Lambs  of  the 

'  See  "  History  of  the  Church  of  England",  Vol.  vi.,  pp.  IVS-G,  note. 

'  "Three  Fifteenth-Century  Chronicles  with  Historical  Memoranda  by 
John  Stowe,  the  Antiquary,  and  contemporary  Notes  of  Occurrences 
written  by  him  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  ",  Camden  Society,  New 
Series,  Vol.  xxviii.,  by  James  Gairdner,  1880,  p.  143.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  one  Brown  and  his  followers,  called  "Brownings",  are  mentioned  in 
this  passage.  "  Brownyngs  "  certainly  suggests  the  Brownists.  It  looks 
very  much  as  if  Stowe,  while  examining  these  notes  at  a  period  after 
1.583,  mistook  this  Puritan  Browni  for  Robert  Browne,  and  added  the 
words  in  parenthesis.  Otherwise  these  ''  Memoranda  "  appear  to  be  fairly 
trustworthy  records  made  by  Stowe  about  the  time  at  which  the  events 
described  occurred. 


Puritanism  and  Separatism  until  1581       85 

Lord.  They  kept  theyr  churche  in  y*  Mynorys  with  out  Algate. 
Afterwards  they  assorublyd  in  a  shype  or  lyghtar  in  Seynt  Katheryns 
Poole,  then  in  a  chopers  howse,  ny  Wolle  Key  in  Tharase  strete, 
wher  only  the  goodman  of  the  howse  and  the  preachar,  whose  name 
was  Brown  (and  his  awditory  wer  cawlyd  the  Brownyngs),  were 
comyttyd  to  ward  ;  then  aftarward  in  Pudynge  Lane  in  a  mynisters 
hows  in  a  blynd  ally,  and  vij  of  them  were  committyd  to  y*  Countar 
in  y*  Poultrye.  Then  aftar,  on  y*'  29  of  February,  beyng  Shrove 
Sonday,  at  Mountjoye  Place,  wher  y®  byshop,  beyng  warnyd  by  the 
constables,  bad  let  then  [them  ?]  alone.     Then  at  Westmystar,  the 

4  of  Marche,  and  in  a  goldsmythis  house  nere  to  the  Savoy,  the 

5  of  Marche,  wher  beynge  taken  to  the  nombar  of  60  and  odd,  only 
3  were  sent  to  the  Gatehouse  In  many  othar  placis  were  and  are  the 
lyke.  On  Estar  day  at  Hogston  in  my  Lord  of  Londons  mans 
house  to  y*  nombar  of  120,  and  on  Lowe  Sonday  in  a  carpentars 
hous  in  Aldarman  bury.  It  is  to  be  noated  that  suche  as  were  at 
eny  tyme  comitted  for  suche  congregatynge  were  sone  delyvered 
withoute  punishemente. 

In  the  "Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to 
English  Affairs,  preserved  principally  in  the  Archives  of 
Simancas.  Vol.  ii.  Elizabeth  1568-1579",  London,  1894,  there 
are  three  or  four  other  passages  evidently  relating  to  these 
independent  Puritans: — 

About  a  week  ago  they  discovered  here  a  newly  invented  sect, 
called  by  those  who  belong  to  it  "  the  pui'e  or  stainless  religion." 
They  met  to  the  number  of  150  in  a  house  where  their  preacher  used 
a  half  a  tub  for  a  pulpit,  and  was  girded  with  a  white  cloth.  Each 
one  brought  with  him  whatever  food  he  had  at  home  to  eat,  and  the 
leaders  divided  money  amongst  those  who  were  poorer,  saying  that 
they  imitated  the  life  of  the  apostles  and  refused  to  enter  the 
temples  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  supper  as  it  was  a  papistical 
ceremony.  This  having  come  to  the  ears  of  the  city  authorities, 
they,  in  accord  with  the  Queen's  Council,  sent  40  halberdiers  to 
arrest  the  people.  They  found  them  meeting  in  the  house  and 
arrested  the  preacher  and  five  of  the  principals,  leaving  the  others, 
and  have  appointed  persons  to  convert  them. — London  16th  February 
15681 

^  Seventy-two  men  aud  women  were  taken  on  March  4,  156|,  in  the 
house  of  James  Tynue,  goldsmith,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  volume  of  docu- 
ments, but  this  passage  from  Stowe  for  some  reason  gives  the  date 
incorrectly  as  March  5.  This  citation,  however,  may  riglitly  suggest  that 
only  three  of  the  seventy-two  captives  were  then  imprisoned,  and  that 
as  captures  were  frequent,  only  a  few  were  imprisoned  in  each  in- 
stance. 

=»  P.  7. 


86  Early  English  Dissenters 

Another  letter  written  on  Feb.  28,  1568,  says^: — 

I  wrote  to  your  Majesty  that  a  new  sect  had  been  discovered ; 
people  who  call  themselves  of  the  pure  or  apostolic  religion,  and 
that  a  houseful  of  them  had  been  found,  and  six  of  them  arrested. 
Another  of  their  meeting  places  has  been  found,  and  six  of  the 
principal  members  of  this  congregation,  too,  have  been  arrested. 
I  am  told  by  a  well-informed  Catholic  that  he  is  certain  there  are 
5,000  of  them  in  this  city  alone. 

The  following  further  reference  to  the  Puritans  occurs  in  a 

letter  written  on  March  14,  1568^^: — 

Orders  have  been  given  to  release  the  people  who  call  them- 
selves members  of  the  pure  or  apostolic  religion,  on  condition  that 
within  20  days  they  conform  to  the  religion  of  the  State  or  leave  the 
country. 

Still  another  reference  appears  under  the  date  June  26, 
1568^:— 

In  spite  of  the  threats  made  to  the  sect  called  the  Puritans,  to 
prevent  their  meeting  together,  I  am  informed  that  recently  as 
many  as  400  of  them  met  near  here,  and,  although  a  list  of  their 
names  was  taken,  only  six  of  them  were  arrested,  in  order  to  avoid 
scandal  and  also  because  they  have  their  influential  abettors. 

How  long  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  existed  before 
and  after  June  20,  1567,  is  not  definitely  known.  Mr  Frere 
says  it  had  met  for  a  month  when  it  was  discovered  ^  but  un- 
fortunately this  statement  seems  to  be  based  only  on  the  sup- 
position, that  at  this  early  date  the  church  of  Richard  Fitz 
and  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  were  one  and  the  same, 
— a  supposition,  the  truth  of  which  can  be  seriously  questioned 
on  account  of  evidence  at  hand,  while  it  cannot  be  proved 
because  of  the  dearth  of  further  evidence.  My  present  im- 
pression is  that  even  in  1567  Fitz's  church  was  separatist,  and 
distinct  from  the  Plumbers'  Hall  company.  As  to  the  length 
of  time  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  existed  after  the 
summer  of  1567,  it  may  be  said  with  safety,  that  it  certainly 
continued  its  activities  for  two  years  and  a  half®,  probably  until 
1572,  and  perhaps  even  longer. 

1  P.  11.  2  p.  12.  3  p  43. 

*  "The  English  Church",  London,  1904,  p.  127. 

^  Grindal  in  a  letter  of  .Tan.  4,  1569/70,  complains  of  the  continued 
acti\*ity  of  Bonham  and  Crane,  and  urges  the  imprisonment  of  at  least 


Puritanism  and  Separatism  until  1581       87 

One  point  must  be  noticed  at  greater  length  before  we  leave 
the  previously  mentioned  citation  from  Grindal's  letter  to 
Bullinger,  dated  (English  text)  June  11,  1568.  Before  this 
time,  Grindal  says,  there  had  been  a  secession  from  the  Plumbers' 
Hall  congregation,  and  the  seceders  had  been  excommunicated. 
Is  it  possible  to  ascertain  who  these  seceders  were,  and  why  they 
seceded  ? 

Fortunately  the  answer  to  this  question,  I  think,  can  be 
made  in  the  affirmative.  It  has  already  been  made  sufficiently 
evident  that  this  congregation  was  not  separatist,  but  inde- 
pendent Puritan,  so  that  it  would  be  impossible  for  one 
accurately  to  speak  of  its  members  as  seceding  into  the  Church 
of  England,  for  its  members  had  never  separated  from  the 
State  Church.  Therefore,  it  is  manifest,  that  when  Grindal 
says  that  some  had  seceded  from  the  Plumbers'  Hall  congre- 
gation and  been  excommunicated,  he  cannot  mean  that  some 
had  returned  to  the  services  of  the  State  Church.  On  the 
contrary,  the  secedere  were  apparently  some  of  the  congregation 
who  felt  that  even  an  independent  Puritan  position  was  not 
satisfactory,  and  that  not  only  a  change  in  the  names  of  church 
officers  and  in  vestments  was  needed,  but  that  not  even  the 
second  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI,  or  the  Genevan  Order  of 
service  should  be  used  ;  in  other  words,  that  no  invention  of 
man  should  find  a  place  in  church  worship.  They  therefore 
"  seceded",  to  use  Archbishop  Grindal's  phrase,  in  order  to 
secure  such  worship  as  they  desired.  Of  course,  this  move 
on  their  part  was  returned  by  the  counter-move  of  excom- 
munication. 

It  is  not  easy  to  tell  whether  this  secession  occurred  during 
the  first  or  the  second  imprisonment  of  the  Plumbers'  Hall 
congregation,  or  even  during  the  period  intervening  between 
them.  Fitz,  and  possibly  some  of  his  church,  may  have  been  in 
prison  for  all  these  months,  and  only  in  Bridewell  may  the 
members  of  the  two  congregations  have  come  into  contact  with 

twelve  of  the  "most  desperate"  of  the  congregation  in  the  common 
gaols  at  Cambridge  and  Oxford,  and  perhaps  of  some  others  in  London 
prisons  ("The  Remains  of  Edmund  Grindal,  D.D.",  Parker  Society,  1843, 
p.  319). 


88  Early  English  Dissenters 

each  other.  Under  circumstances  like  these  some  of  the 
Plumbers'  Hall  congregation  may  have  begun  to  sympathize 
with  the  separatist  movement,  though  there  was  probably  little 
favourable  opportunity  to  manifest  their  inclinations  until  after 
April  22,  1569,  when  the  thirty-one  Plumbers'  Hall  con- 
venticlers  were  set  free.  The  names  of  some  of  the  seceders, 
at  least,  are  probably  to  be  discovered  by  a  comparison  of  the 
names  contained  in  the  Plumbers'  Hall  lists  with  the  names 
appended  to  the  petition  drawn  up  in  1571  by  Fitz's  congre- 
gation, with  which,  I  take  it,  the  seceders  united.  Of  the 
names  of  the  27  members  who  signed  the  petition  of  Fitz's 
church,  adding  thereto  those  of  Richard  Fitz,  Thomas  Bowland, 
John  Bolton,  Giles  Fowler,  and  Randall  Partridge,  four  of 
whom  are  mentioned  in  the  text  of  the  document  (making  32 
names  in  all),  we  find  only  eight  or  nine  mentioned  in  the 
Plumbers'  Hall  lists,  namely,  John  Bolton ;  Thomas  Bowland ; 
Randall  Partridge ;  Edde,  or  Edye,  Burre,  or  Burris ;  John 
Kynge,  or  Kinge  ;  Jhon,  or  John,  Leonards ;  Elizabeth  Bamford, 
or  Balfurth ;  Elizabeth  Sclake,  or  Slacke ;  and  probably  Eliza- 
bethe  Leanordes.  There  are  also  four  sets  of  two  names  each 
(which  may  be  made  from  the  lists  of  the  Plumbers'  Hall 
congregation  and  the  list  of  the  separatist  "  Privy  Church "), 
whose  similarity  suggests  relationship  of  some  kind  between 
their  owners,  as  Robert  Sparrow  and  Harry  Sparrowe;  Jone 
Evanes  and  Annes  Evance ;  James  Ireland  and  Joane  Ireland ; 
and  Margarette  Stockes  and  Helene  Stokes. 

After  the  addition  of  the  seceders  to  the  "  Privy  Church  "  of 
Richard  Fitz,  church  officers  soon  appear  to  have  been  chosen. 
Fitz  retained  his  position  as  minister,  while  Bolton  was  elected 
elder,  and  Bowland  deacon.  Whether  Fitz  was  given  his  liberty 
about  the  same  time  that  the  Plumbers'  Hall  prisoners  re- 
ceived theirs  is  not  evident,  but  he  certainly  died  in  prison. 
Bolton  and  Bowland  were  later  imprisoned  for  a  third  time,  but 
the  date  of  their  capture  is  not  at  present  known.  Bolton^  seems 
in  some  way  to   have  been  persuaded  to   recant  publicly  at 

1  See  John  Robinson's  "A  |  lUSTIFICATION  |  OF  |  SEPARA- 
TION", 1610,  40,  p.  54,  and  H.[enry]  A.[insworth]'s  "  COVNTER- 
POYSON",  1608,  p.  39. 


Puritanism  and  Separatism  until  1581       89 

Paul's  Cross.  Thereupon,  he  was  excommunicated  by  the 
church,  and  he  afterwards  hanged  himself.  Fitz,  Bowland, 
and  Giles  Fowler  were  evidently  kept  close  prisoners  until 
they  died.  Most  of  the  congregation,  however,  appear  to  have 
been  set  free,  and  in  spite  of  the  imprisonment  of  their  leaders 
lived  on.  Their  activities  are  possibly  referred  to  in  a  letter  of 
Bishop  Cox  to  Henry  Bullinger,  dated  Ely,  July  10,  1570^  and 
probably  described  in  the  following  passage  from  a  letter  of 
Bishop  Horn  to  Henry  Bullinger  dated,  August  8,  1571*: — 

There  are  not  however  wanting  some  men  of  inferior  rank  and 
standing,  deficient  indeed  both  in  sagacity  and  sense,  and  entirely 
ignorant  and  unknown,  who,  since  they  do  not  yet  perceive  the 
church  to  square  with  their  wishes,  or  rather  vanities,  and  that  so 
far  from  agreeing  with  their  follies,  the  wind  is  rather  directly 
contrary,  for  this  cause  some  of  them  desert  their  posts,  and  hide 
themselves  in  idleness  and  obscurity;  others,  shaping  out  for  them- 
selves their  own  barks,  call  together  conventicles,  elect  their  own 
bishops,  and  holding  synods  one  with  another,  frame  and  devise 
their  own  laws  for  themselves.  They  reject  preaching,  despise 
communion,  would  have  all  churches  destroyed,  as  having  been 
formerly  dedicated  to  popery  ;  nor  are  they  content  with  merely 
deriding  our  ministers,  but  regard  the  office  itself  as  not  worth 
a  straw.  And  thus,  as  far  as  lieth  in  them,  they  are  too  rashly  and 
precipitately  accessory  to  the  wretched  shipwreck  of  our  church, 
and  are  doubtless  retarding  not  a  little  the  free  progress  of  the 
gospel.  They  themselves,  in  the  mean  time,  wonderfully  tossed 
about  by  I  know  not  what  waves  of  error,  and  miserably  borne 
along,  I  know  not  whither,  on  the  various  gales  of  vanity,  are 
reduced  to  the  most  absurd  ravings  of  opinion.  They  therefore  cut 
themselves  off,  as  they  say,  from  us ;  or  rather,  like  Theudas,  they 
depart  with  their  own  party,  and  act  just  like  persons  who,  per- 
ceiving the  wind  somewhat  against  them,  so  that  they  cannot 
directly  reach  the  point  they  aim  at,  refuse  to  reserve  themselves  for 
a  more  favourable  breeze,  but  leaping  out  of  the  ship,  rush  headlong 
into  the  sea  and  are  drowned. 

A  letter  of  Bishop  Cox  written  to  Rodolph  Gualter  as  late 
as  Feb.  12,  1571/2,  seems  to  show  that  the  "  Privy  Church "  was 
still  in  existence  and  active^: — 

We  are  undeservedly  branded  with  the  accusation  of  not  having 
perfonned  our  duty,  because  we  do  not  defend  the  cause  of 
those  whom  we  regard  as  disturbers  of   peace  and  religion  ;   and 

*  "Zurich  Letters"  (Parker  Society,  first  series,  Vol.  vii.),  p.  221. 
2  nrid.,  pp.  248-9.  »  Ibid.,  p.  237. 


.90  Early  English  Disse7iters 

who  by  the  vehemence  of  their  harangues  have  so  maddened  the 
wretched  multitude,  and  driven  some  of  them  to  that  pitch  of 
frenzy,  that  they  now  obstinately  refuse  to  enter  our  churches, 
either  to  baptize  their  children,  or  to  partake  of  the  Lord's 
suppex^,  or  to  hear  sermons.  They  are  entirely  separated  both  from 
us  and  from  those  good  brethren  of  ours ;  they  seek  bye  paths  ; 
they  establish  a  private  religion,  and  assemble  in  private  houses,  and 
there  perform  their  sacred  rites,  as  the  Donatists  of  old,  and  the 
Anabaptists  now ;. . . 

Perhaps  it  was  about  this  time  that  the  members  of  the 
"  Privy  Church  "  sent  a  written  appeal  to  Queen  Elizabeth  in 
behalf  of  England  and  signed  with  the  names  of  twenty-seven 
persons.  The  Queen  seems  to  have  handed  the  document 
over  to  the  Bishop  of  London  as  it  bears  the  words  "  B.  of 
London.  Pure  tans",  and  from  the  fact  that  the  words  "  in  white 
Chappell  streate"  are  written  in  the  margin  beside  the  first 
column  of  signatures,  it  is  probable  that  the  homes  of  some  of 
the  church-members,  or  perhaps  one  of  the  places  where  they 
held  their  meetings,  had  been  discovered,  and  that  the  members 
were  subsequently  taken  prisoners  and  the  congregation  sub- 
dued or  broken  up.  At  any  rate,  I  have  as  yet  found  no 
evidence  of  its  further  continuance.  Whether  the  two  printed 
papers  of  the  church,  which  are  now  in  the  Public  Record 
Ofiice  with  the  appeal,  were  originally  sent  with  it,  is  not 
apparent. 

Two  questions  need  to  be  answered  before  we  leave  the 
story  of  this  separatist  congregation  of  Richard  Fitz :  1.  What 
were  some  of  its  principal  views  ?  2.  What  right  has  it  to 
be  called  as  by  Dr  R.  W.  Dale  the  "first  regularly  constituted 
English  Congregational  Church  of  which  any  record  remains"^  ? 

1.  The  entire  texts  of  the  three  extant  papers  of  this 
church  are  given  in  the  volume  of  documents.  Only  the  most 
characteristic  views,  therefore,  are  here  given.  They  are  as 
follows : — 

(1)  In  the  printed  paper  signed  with  Richard  Fitz's  name 
the  word  "  congregation  "  is  not  used,  but  the  expression  "  the 
priuye  churche  in  London". 

(2)  This  Privy  Church  had  three  main  objects  for  which 

1  "History  of  English  Congregationalism",  London,  1907,  p.  95. 


almigbtif,tbattbcrcrcl!qnf60fanttt!)JiCcbcabom(nalj|ebefo,ierljE!LojDeontC5ol», 
.ano  alfo  fo:  tbat  bp  tbp  poUicr  ano  mcmcftrcngt!)  ann  groOncB  of  the  liojocmtxljoo 
atftlit,  3  am  r fcapcc from  p  filtbrncB  «  poltaKon  of thtfc  Dttcttabfe  traoitions,  tlijonffft 
rtjf  bnott}lcogcofourl.o;DcanDrauiour  JcfuBCbJift: 

2nD  latt  of  all,  in  afmucb  as  bp  tbc  U)o:fepng  alfo  of  tbc  HoiOt  Jt  fos  W  ftolp  (pitite,  % 
banclovncfiinpjapcr,  anDbentpngeo05lud;Dc,  tuttbtbofctbatljaucnotpelD^Otot^tiB 
^mtatronfe  tral^,  notlDttbttanopng  tbe  Dartgr^fot  nottomm^ngto  mp  parpa)cl)tirc1).ti* 
I  %btvfo7t  3  tome  nor  batijc  agapne  to  tbe  pjcattgnf  cs  .tc,  of  tbcm  tljat  ^aue  rcceaaeo 
:«-    tbf fe  tnar^a  of tt)c  IJompQ)  bcaft. 

I.  Cl5cfanreof€>oi)«tommanDrmfnt,  togofojftDarDcfopcrfifttfon.ftcbjcta.tf.tJcrfe.r; 
.    2.Co?intl).7-t3rrfc.i.  pralm.84..  tfrfe.r.  e-pbeC  4.Bcrrc.if 
jT   airo  to atjopoc  tbcra. Uoma.is.  ticrfciy.  Cpbcfl.f.  tjccfcii.  i.%])tt[al,^,  tjcrfc.ii* 

;  2,  C  iBctaufc  tlicp  arc  abomlnattons  bcfo;c  H)e  lLo;i>c  oac  (2^oo>  JDf  nt.7,  t)etre0.2r.  an0.z^ 
.     a)cutcco.i3.  fecrff.iy.  ©jcbtclljif,  terfc.ff, 

b.  C  3  tupllnotbf  antific  te(ti)  mp  pitfcncctfiorc  filtbp  raggw,  tDftkft  bjpng  tftctjeaocnlg 
*^   too^Dcot t^cctcrnalloucLo^OcOoo, into boi«iagc,fubit£t<on,8nOBaaette. 

^C  IBetanfc  ?  tDonlo  not  rommunfcate  luftl)  otbcr  tnrnncs  Unnts.  i.Jol&n.  tcrftB.9.  «o» 
I    anft.u.  i.u;o;intIj.<y.  Uccfe.iy.  SEoucfj  no  bntlcanctbpng.tt.  ^iratft.ij.  becre.i. 

pr.  c  ffificpgeac  offctice«,  botfj  tfjc  p^tatlicr  f  tftc^eama.  Kom.i<j  ttt.i7,  anfie.ir.tctfM 

^.  C  Stiicr  iwjpcrffcnf  c  oar  faatonr  Bfcfas  C62(ft  in  6f0  m^mbehJ.  artt0.9.t«rftfl.4,anfi.< 
>-    2.'Co:mt().i.  tjcrfcf. 

V  aifo  rtcpreittte  ano  otrppfftoar ILojBc  ann  (saioat m(uB  Cfjjfff.  ilnSe.io.  tjfrfr.i<f. 

y    £eo:Pouec  tljofc  labourers,tobom  at  tljcpjaper of tftc  faitbfnl,tbe  !Lo;iw  bati^  fent  fnrrt 
^   tn  to  ft<0  barutft :  tftcp  rcfHfe,  ano  alfo  ttiea,  ^atJj.9.  tictfc.js, 

M.  C  Sbcfepoptrtj  garmwfs  .tc,  arc  notn  beamt  ttrpaboUcs  (n  babe,  betaoft  (fftv  are 
p    eralteo  aboue  tbe  1do;D£  of  tbe  almtgbtte. 

9.  C II  come  not  to  tbcm  berattre  tfie?  l^onitie  be  ail^anreti ,  anb  To  ieaue  tbcit  Jbolatrons 
gatninitB.ic  z,ffi1)Eiral.j  t)erfe.i+.  j^f  anp  man  obcp  not  ourfaptn0e0,  notcbtm.tc 

C<l!5ot)  getielw  fircngtfj  ff^I  to  Qrpne  in  fntftpttc  tnbre  Ifje  rroffe,  tfjaf  tbcblr  fft  b  tDo;Be 
of  our  (S^ob  map  onclp  rule,  anb  bane  tbe  btgbeu  place,  to  raQ  colone  llrong  bolbr0,  to 
HcQrop  02  oncrtbzoU)  poltrtra  0:  imagtnation0,  anD  eucrp  btgb  tbpng  tbat  i0  eraltcO  a* 
jratnd  tbe  fenotulcDgc  of  C?oii,  anD  to  b^png  in  to  capttuitie  at  fubiettton}  rnerptboagbt 
to  tbc  obeotcncc  of  <£b2itt. ft.  i.«Io2intb.io  toerfcs.^.  anfi.  v.  n,  tbat  titt  name  anb  toojbc 

^    oCtbf ctccnalloucJLo;D€!£;o07m8s  be<;jralteo  oixaasni^Q aboutfdl^ingaf^midau 

"^^jj^oerre.^ 

V  ■  C FINIS, 


Skiwkatist  Covenant  of  Richard  Fitz's  1'hivv  Church.     (Facsimile.) 
Date  betweeij  1567  and  1571.     See  Vol.  i.,  page  91. 


Puritanism  and  Separatism  until  1581       91 

it  strove :  "  Fyrste  and  formoste",  to  have  "  the  Glorious  worde 
and  Euangell  preached... freely,  and  purelye.  Secondly  to  haue 
the  Sacraments  mynistred  purely... without  any  tradicion  or 
inuention  of  man.  And  laste. .  .to  haue,  not  the  fylthye  Cannon 
lawe,  but  dissiplyne  onelye  ". 

(3)  The  second  printed^  paper  of  this  church  is  what 
seems  to  be  the  separatist  covenant  of  the  congregation,  though 
the  term  covenant  is  not  used,  and  though  the  text  is  not 
expressed  exactly  in  the  terras  of  a  covenant.  The  document  is 
general  and  unsigned,  but  I  imagine  that  every  member  of  the 
church  was  supposed  either  to  assent  to  or  sign  it,  or  other 
copies  of  it  reserved  for  the  purpose.  After  what  I  take  to  be 
the  text  of  the  separatist  agreement  or  statement,  nine  reasons 
for  separation  are  given  with  Scripture  references,  and  at  the 
end  is  a  prayer  for  strength  to  continue  to  strive  for  the  victory 
of  the  "  word  of  our  God  ". 

(4)  The  third  and  last  document  is  a  manuscript  clearly 
written  on  one  side  of  a  good-sized  sheet  of  paper,  and  is 
signed  by  27  members.  It  is  the  previously  mentioned  appeal 
to  Queen  Elizabeth  evidently  written  in  1571  (Old  Style) 
stating  the  cause  for  the  existence  of  the  congregation  and 
its  reasonableness,  and  praying  that  she  will  follow  the  example 
of  Jehoshaphat  in  [this]  the  thirteenth  year  of  her  reign  by 
utterly  overthrowing  Roman  Catholicism  in  England.  The 
appeal  manifests  more  spirit  than  the  two  other  papers.  It 
expresses  the  hope  that  "  the  word  of  our  god  may  be  set  to 
raygne,  and  haue  the  hiest  place,  to  rule  &  reforme  all  estates... 
to  cut  downe,  to  roote  out,  and  vtterly  destroy  by  the  axe  of 
the  same  his  holy  word,  all  monumentes  of  Idolatry,  to  wit, 
that  wicked  cannon  law,... to  destroy  idoles  temples  &  chapels 
which  the  papistes  or  infideles  haue  builded  to  the  service  of 
their  godes."  The  congregation  prays  further  that  her  Majesty 
may  "send  forth  princes  and  ministers  and  geue  them  the  booke 
of  the  Lord,  that  they  may  bryng  home  the  people  of  god  to  the 
purity  and  truthe  of  the  apostolycke  churche  ". 

(5)  This  appeal  also   contains  some  interesting  informa- 

'  This  is  not  a  manuscript  as  stated  by  Dr  Dale  ("  History  of  English 
Congregationalism",  p.  92). 


92  Early  English  Dissenters 

tion  concerning  the  Privy  Church  itself.  It  is  here  made  plain 
that  this  "  church  "  is  only  one  congregation,  and  not  more  than 
one.  Its  minister  Richard  Fitz,  its  deacon  Thomas  Bowland, 
Randall  Partridge,  and  Giles  Fowler  have  all  died  in  prison. 
John  Bolton  is  not  mentioned,  nor  does  he  sign  the  appeal.  He 
had  therefore  probably  recanted  and  been  excommunicated 
before  the  document  was  written,  but  whether  he  had  already 
hanged  himself  is  doubtful,  as  such  an  incident  might  perhaps 
have  been  mentioned. 

(6)  Apparently  the  congregation  met  sometimes  "  in 
white  Chappell  streate",  and  it  is  described  as  "a  poore  con- 
gregation whom  god  hath  seperated  from  the  churches  of 
englande  [?]  and  from  the  mingled  and  faulse  worshipping 
therin  vsed".  The  appeal  also  says  that  "  at  this  day  [1571]  we 
do  serue  the  lord  every  saboth  day  in  houses,  and  on  the  fourth 
day  in  the  weke  we  meet  or  cum  together  weekely  to  vse  prayer 
&  exercyse  disciplyne  on  them  whiche  do  deserve  it". 

2.  These  are  the  main  facts  that  we  know  about  this  con- 
gregation. What  conclusion  then  may  we  draw  from  them  as 
to  Dr  Dale's  statement  that  this  is  the  "  first  regularly  con- 
stituted English  Congregational  Church  of  which  any  record 
remains  "  ? 

In  the  first  place,  the  Privy  Church  certainly  was  separatist 
and  congregational,  but  it  was  apparently  congregational  more 
by  accident,  so  to  speak,  than  because  of  the  maintenance  of  any 
particular  form  of  church  polity  on  the  part  of  its  members. 
Also,  as  far  as  organization  is  concerned,  was  this  Privy  Church 
a  regularly  constituted  English  Congregational  Church  ?  This 
cannot  be  unconditionally  answered  in  the  affirmative.  A  regu- 
larly constituted  English  Congregational  Church  for  the  period 
before  1700,  at  least,  was  organized  by  means  of  a  church 
covenant,  but  this  congregation  was  not  apparently  familiar 
with  that  term,  though  it  has  been  pointed  out  that  the  second 
printed  document  of  the  church  is  practically  a  separatist 
covenant.  The  real  congregational  church  polity  was  only 
expressed  later,  and  developed  by  slow  evolution.  This  church 
has  its  part  in  that  evolution.  It  was  a  pioneer  congregation  and 
undoubtedly  made  some  advance  over  its  predecessors,  but  not 


Puritanism  mid  Separatism  until  1581       93 

until  later  was  organized  the  "  first  regularly  constituted 
English  Congregational  Church."  Richard  Fitz's  church  was 
simply  the  earliest  separatist  congregation  of  which  any  con- 
siderable historical  record  has  been  preserved.  Its  ideal  as 
manifested  in  the  appeal  to  Queen  Elizabeth  appears  not  to 
have  been  a  permanent  separatist  Congregationalism,  but  a 
national  Church  movement  led  by  the  Queen  herself,  her 
princes,  and  ministers,  to  "  bryng  home  the  people  of  god  to 
the  purity  and  truthe  of  the  apostolycke  churche",  utterly  to 
destroy  and  remove  all  relics  of  Roman  Catholicism,  and  to  set 
up  what  may  be  described  as  "  the  apostolycke  churche  ".  The 
congregation  does  not  appear  to  have  tried  to  formulate  any 
church  polity,  or  to  show  what  constituted  an  apostolic  church. 
Other  matters  took  up  their  attention,  and  it  was  left  to  Robert 
Browne  first  to  outline  that  religious  Utopia  which  they  longed 
to  enjoy,  but  had  no  hope  to  realize. 

Minute  knowledge  of  the  organizations  both  of  Puritans  and 
separatists  at  this  early  period  is  difficult  to  secure.  Concerning 
the  early  English  Classes  there  is  considerable  direct  or  indirect 
manuscript  testimony  still  extant,  but  of  the  separatists  of  this 
period  we  know  almost  nothing.  Now  came  the  years  of  the 
publication  of  the  "Admonition  to  the  Parliament",  and  of  the 
succeeding  writings  of  Thomas  Cartwright  and  Walter  Travers. 
In  1575  Archbishop  Parker  died  and  was  succeeded  by  Arch- 
bishop Grindal,  who,  had  he  been  permitted  by  the  Privy 
Council,  would  have  allowed  a  good  deal  of  variety  in  religious 
uniformity.  That  body,  however,  would  not  permit  any 
tolerance  on  his  part,  and  very  well  understood  how  to  make 
him  more  arduous  in  the  task  of  strictly  enforcing  uniformity. 
As  his  rigour  increased  the  position  of  the  Puritan  leaders  ot 
course  became  more  precarious,  and  requests  for  reformation  of 
discipline  more  and  more  urgent.  However,  after  the  issue  of 
Thomas  Cartwright's  "  Second  Reply"  to  Whitgift  in  1577,  there 
seems  to  have  been  a  lull  in  published  religious  controversy 
between  supporters  of  the  orthodox  Church  of  England  and  the 
Puritans  and  separatists  until  the  appearance  Robert  Browne's 
first  printed  works  in  1582. 


CHAPTER  III 

ROBERT  BROWNE  AND  THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  THE  FIRST 
ENGLISH  CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCH 

I. 

The  first  Englishman  of  strong  intellectual  gifts  to  win 
distinction  as  a  preacher  of  separatism  and  as  the  bold  author 
of  works  which  directly  encouraged  separation  from  the  Church 
of  England  was  Robert  Browne.  As  we  already  know  other 
English  separatists  had  preceded  him,  but  their  influence  is 
insignificant  when  compared  with  his.  Even  Richard  Fitz,  for 
instance,  was  practically  unknown  to  the  world  until  half  a 
century  ago,  but  the  name  of  Robert  Browne  from  1582  to  the 
present  time  has  been  a  landmark  in  English  church  history, 
known  not  only  in  England,  but  also  on  the  Continent  and  in 
America.  While,  however,  in  the  past  his  life  and  real  views 
have  been  much  misunderstood  or  misrepresented,  recent  in- 
vestigations have  made  possible  a  juster  estimate  of  the  man. 
He  was  in  fact  one  of  the  most  fearless  and  honest  religious 
thinkers  of  a  great  age,  who,  though  he  himself  receded  from 
some  of  his  early  and  more  bitter  opinions,  left  therewith  such 
an  impress  on  his  contemporaries  as  to  stimulate  many  to 
similar  and  even  more  advanced  views  long  after  he  had 
returned  to  a  comparatively  conservative  position. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  here  to  treat  in  detail  all  the  events  of 
Browne's  life.  Those  who  wish  to  know  more  of  the  recent  dis- 
coveries concerning  him  may  examine  the  four  articles  of  the 
Rev.  F.  Ives  Cater  in  the  "  Transactions  "  of  the  Congregational 
Historical  Society^  the  present  author's  three  pamphlets  re- 

1  "Robert  Browne's  Ancestors  and  Descendants  ",  in  Vol.  ii.,  No.  3,  for 
Sept.,  1905 ;  "  New  Facts  Relating  to  Robert  Browne  ",  in  Vol.  in.,  No.  4,  for 
January,  1906;  "Robert  Browne  and  the  Achurch  Parish  Register",  in 
Vol.  in.,  No.  2,  for  May,  1907 ;  and  "The  later  Years  of  Robert  Browne",  in 
Vol.  III.,  No.  5,  for  May,  1908. 


Robert  Brotvne  and  his  Congregation        95 

lating  to  Browne \  and  Dr  Frederick  J.  Powicke's  "Robert 
Browne  Pioneer  of  Modern  Congregationalism",  London,  1910. 
Only  certain  essential  points  in  his  career  will  be  at  present 
noted ^  and  more  particularly  those  that  relate  to  the  congre- 
gation which  he  organized,  and  to  his  general  influence  on,  and 
position  in,  the  religious  history  of  his  time. 

While  Browne  was  preaching  in  Cambridge  in  1579,  it 
should  be  remembered,  he  was  not  a  separatist  but  a  Puritan 
rapidly  inclining  towards  separatism,  and,  though  unwillingly, 
even  had  in  his  possession  an  Archbishop's  license  to  preach. 
He  was  also  offered  the  charge  of  a  parish  church  in  that  town, 
but  declined  to  accept  it  as  he  did  not  wish  to  be  ordained  by 
a  bishop.  His  views  at  that  time  were  undoubtedly  advanced^ 
but  they  became  more  pronouncedly  so  after  Richard  Bancroft, 
by  instruction  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  called  upon 
him  in  his  illness  to  take  away  his  license.  Browne  promised 
Bancroft  to  preach  no  longer  in  Cambridge,  but  as  he  had 
heard  of  the  prevalence  of  independent  views  (at  Norwich  ?) 
"  in  Norfolke",  he  seems  to  have  thought  of  going  thither.    His 

1  "The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne  (1550?-1633)  Father  of  Congre- 
gationalism including  various  points  hitherto  unknown  or  misunderstood, 
with  some  account  of  the  development  of  his  religious  views,  and  an  ex- 
tended and  improved  list  of  his  writings",  Oxford  and  London,  1906,  gives 
the  most  essential  information.  The  other  two  pamphlets  are :  '  A  "  New 
Years  Guift"  an  hitherto  lost  treatise  by  Robert  Browne  the  Father 
of  Congregationalism...',  London,  1904,  and  "The  'Retractation'  of 
Robert  Browne  Father  of  Congregationalism...",  Oxford  and  London, 
1907. 

2  The  chronological  scheme  of  Browne's  life  here  presented  is  taken 
chiefly  from  the  author's  "  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne ",  1906. 

3  In  his  admirable  little  book  entitled  "  Robert  Browne  Pioneer  of 
Modern  Congregationalism",  London,  1910,  Dr  Frederick  J.  Powicke  states 
(pp.  19-21)  the  opinion,  that  Browne  was  a  Congregationalist  before  he 
left  Cambridge.  In  one  sense  he  may  have  been,  viz.,  in  much  the  same  sense 
in  which  any  Puritan  of  the  Cartwright  type,  also,  may  perhaps  be  called  a 
Congregationalist.  The  same  Congregational  principles  which  Cartwright 
had  advocated,  Browne  no  doubt  recommended  at  this  time,  as  well  as  some 
still  more  advanced  views,  but  I  know  of  no  saying  of  Browne's  at  this  early 
period,  which  would  justify  us  in  believing  that  at  Cambridge  he  enimciated 
such  Congregational  principles  as  would  be  recognized  as  satisfactory  by 
the  Congregational  churches  of  to-day. 


96  Earhj  English  Dissenters 

intention,  however,  was  modified  for  the  time  by  the  sudden 
return  to  Cambridge  of  a  former  acquaintance,  Robert  Harrison, 
then  of  Norwich.  The  friends  must  already  have  had  some 
ideas  in  common,  and  now  they  discussed  together  the  religious 
difficulties  of  the  time.  Shortly  after  Harrison's  return  to  Nor- 
wich, and  no  doubt  with  his  approval,  Browne  followed  him. 
This  journey  apparently  took  place  in  the  summer  of  1580. 
Longer  talks  now  ensued  wherein  many  questions  pertaining 
to  the  condition  of  the  Church  were  discussed,  as  for  instance, 
what  good  was  to  be  gained  even  from  the  preaching  of  Puritans 
in  the  Church  of  England,  how  faith  was  obtained,  etc.,  etc. 
Harrison  was  with  some  difficulty  largely  won  over  to  his 
friend's  opinions,  but  he  seems  to  have  felt  no  little  hesitation 
in  giving  up  his  liking  for  such  Puritan  preachers  as  the  Rev. 
John  More  and  one  Mr  "  Robardes ".  Mr  More  was  at  this 
time  the  incumbent  of  St  Andrew's,  Norwich,  which  I  have 
recently  shown  to  have  been  practically  a  Congregational  church 
in  the  Church  of  England  ^  Browne,  too,  no  doubt  attended 
services  at  St  Andrew's  and  at  first  thought  highly  of  Mr  More, 
but  later  when  he  began  to  put  his  plans  into  practice,  he  found 
that  More  was  not  different  from  other  Puritans  whom  he  had 
regarded  with  less  favour.  Harrison  was  especially  slow  in 
detecting  the  defects  in  Mr  More,  and  would  have  liked  to 
see  both  him  and  Mr  "Robardes"  join  in  Browne's  plan. 
Later,  however,  seeing  that  this  was  not  to  be  hoped  for,  he 
loyally  joined  in  with  Browne,  when  perhaps  about  January, 
1581,  he  began  to  gather  his  "  companie  "  at  Norwich.  Among 
the  earliest  members  was  one  Edward  Tolwine''. 

1  In  "J.  Tercentena/ry  Memorial  New  Facts  concerning  John  Robinson", 
Oxford  and  London,  1910,  p.  21.  The  same  form  of  Congregationalism 
within  the  Church  of  England  was  very  likely  put  into  practice  by  Browne 
at  Achurch,  where  the  patronage,  it  will  be  remembered,  belonged  to 
the  Browne  family.  In  this  sense  Browne  may  perhaps  be  said  to  have 
really  been  a  Congregationalist  for  about  forty  years  of  his  life,  and  the  old 
"Chapel  House"  would  then  only  have  been  necessary  for  Congregational 
services  during  the  period  of  his  suspension. 

2  "The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists...",  by  Christopher  Lawne 
and  three  others,  1612,  4°,  pp.  18-9,  has  the  following  passage  relating  to 
Tolwine  (see  also  p.  16  for  Tol wine's  first  name) : — 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation        97 

Apparently  not  before  the  early  spring  of  1581  was  com- 
plete separation  undertaken.  Even  then  the  company  in 
NorvN^ich  can  hardly  have  numbered  more  than  forty  people, 
for  when  separatist  doctrine  was  preached  to  them,  some  only 
were  willing  to  follow  Browne.  Furthermore,  after  the  con- 
gregation became  separatist,  still  others  who  had  adopted  his 
latest  views,  were  frightened  by  continued  persecution  and 
forsook  the  company.  These  included  Robert  Barker,  Nicholas 
"  Woedowes ",  Tatsel,  Bond,  and  some  others.  Such  losses 
seem  to  have  made  it  evident  that  the  congregation  needed 
to  be  fiirther  organized,  if  it  was  to  endure.  So  a  day  was 
appointed  for  the  purpose  and  a  covenant  was  drawn  up.  This 
church  covenant  was  not  a  new  invention  of  Robert  Browne's  as 
Dr  Dexter  seems  to  have  supposed,  for  we  know  that  the  idea 
had  been  employed  in  England  from  the  time  of  Queen  Mary, 

"  r  I  iHis  old  man  (Father  [Edward]  Tolmne)  being  about  fourescore 
-■-  yeares  of  age,  the  ancientist  of  their  [the  Brownists']  company  [in 
Amsterdam],  who  saw  the  very  beginning  of  the  separation,  hauing  oft, 
of  old,  entertained  master  Browne  into  his  house,  where  many  con- 
sultations were  held  about  this  matter,  before  the  resolution  of  renouncing 
communion  with  the  Church  of  England  was  agreed  vpon ;  before  master 
Johnson,  or  any  of  the  Franciscans  did  dreame  of  this  way,  vpon  the  first 
separation  of  BroionCy  was  much  moued  to  follow  him  in  this  schisme; 
and  when  Browne  went  to  dwell  at  Middleborough,  resolued  to  have  gone 
after  him  him  [sic']  thither ;  and  to  that  end  sold  vp  his  lining :  but  by  the 
prouidence  of  God,  before  he  was  paid  for  the  same,  the  man  that  bought  it 
died  suddenly,.., And  before  he  could  againe  take  order  for  his  iourney,  he 
vnderstood  of  the  great  troubles  among  them  of  the  separation  at  Middle- 
borough  ;  the  dissolution  of  their  compony  [sic'\ ;  the  departure  of  Browne 
from  that  place ;  and  in  fine,  the  departure  of  Browne  from  his  profession 
also.  But  after  this  againe,  the  doctrine  of  Brow7ie  being  taken  vp  and 
receiued  by  H.  Barrow,  and  afterwards  by  Francis  Johnson,  the  mind  of 
this  old  man  was  againe  troubled  by  their  books  and  writings ;  in  so  much 
that  at  length,  after  he  had  been  long  tossed  vp  and  downe  with  the 
winde  of  their  deceitfull  doctrine,  he  left  his  old  wife  and  friends,  and 
came  vnto  Amsterdam,  there  to  remaine  with  the  Brownists,  about  some 
fine  or  sixe  yeeres  agone...." 

Father  Tolwine  afterwards  came  "to  see  the  error  of  his  schisme, 
and  to  forsake  the  same ".  We  could  wish  that  he  had  left  some 
reminiscences  of  his  experiences  in  separatism,  as  they  would  be  in- 
valuable to-day. 

B.  7 


98  Early  English  Dissenters 

and  in  Scotland  still  earlier.  The  Continental  Anabaptists  also 
made  use  of  such  covenants,  and  some  of  them  were  better  ex- 
pressed and  more  fully  developed  than  this  of  Browne's  company, 
but  it  is  now  evident  that  the  English  and  Scotch  did  not  borrow 
the  Church  Covenant  idea  from  the  Anabaptists.  Formerly, 
almost  the  entire  section  in  "  A  Trve  and  Short  Declaration  ", 
which  describes  the  organization  of  Browne's  congregation 
appeared  to  me  to  be  intended  to  represent  the  text  of  the 
covenant,  but  now  after  further  study  that  seems  hardly  prob- 
able, although  some  of  the  terms  which  are  employed  through- 
out the  account  are  such  as  might  have  been  used  in  a  covenant. 
The  covenant  proper,  therefore,  as  Dr  Dexter  believed,  is  evi- 
dently comprised  in  the  first  three  sentences  of  the  citation 
given  below.  The  rest  is  merely  a  very  exhaustive  statement 
of  how  the  first  regularly  constituted  Congregational  church  on 
English  soil  was  instituted.  Of  the  organization  of  no  other 
very  early  English  church  of  this  type  have  we  so  minute  and 
complete  a  description : — 

so  a  covenant  was  made  &  ther  mutual  consent  was  geuen  to  hould 
to  gether. 

There  were  certaine  chief  pointes  proved  vnto  them  by  the 
scriptures,  all  which  being  particularlie  rehersed  vnto  them  with 
exhortation,  thei  agreed  vpon  them,  &  pronounced  their  agrement  to 
ech  thing  particularlie,  saiing,  to  this  we  geue  our  consent.  First 
therefore  thei  gaue  their  consent,  to  ioine  them  selues  to  the  Lord, 
in  one  couenant  &  felloweshipp  together,  &  to  keep  &  seek  agrement 
vnder  his  lawes  &  gouernment :  and  therefore  did  vtterlie  ilee  & 
auoide  such  like  disorders  &  wickednes,  as  was  mencioned  before. 
Further  thei  agreed  off  those  which  should  teach  them,  and  watch 
for  the  saluation  of  their  soules,  whom  thei  allowed  &  did  chose  as 
able  &  meete  ffor  that  charge.  For  thei  had  sufficient  triall  and 
testimonie  thereoff  by  that  which  thei  hard  &  sawe  by  them,  &  had 
receaued  of  others.  So  thei  praied  for  their  watchfulnes  &  diligence, 
&  promised  their  obedience[.] 

Likewise  an  order  was  agreed  on  ffor  their  meetinges  together, 
ffor  their  exercises  therin,  as  for  praier,  thanckes  giuing,  reading  of 
the  scriptures,  for  exhortation  and  edifiing,  ether  by  all  men  which 
had  the  guift,  or  by  those  which  had  a  speciall  charge  before  others. 
And  for  the  lavvefulnes  off  putting  forth  questions,  to  learne  the 
trueth,  as  iff  anie  thing  seemed  doubtful  &  hard,  to  require  some  to 
shewe  it  more  plainly,  or  for  anie  to  shewe  it  him  selfe  &  to  cause 
the  rest  to  vnderstand  it.  Further  for  noting  out  anie  speciall 
matter  of  edifiing  at  the  meeting,  or  for  talcking  seuerally  there[t]6, 


Robert  Browne  arid  his  Congregation        99 

with  some  particulars,  i£F  none  did  require  publique  audience,  or  if 
no  vvaightier  it  more  necessarie  matter  were  handled  of  others. 
Againe  it  was  agreed  that  anie  might  protest,  appeale,  complaine, 
exhort,  dispute,  reproue  ifec.  as  he  had  occasion,  but  yet  in  due 
order,  which  Vvas  then  also  declared.  Also  that  all  should  fui'ther 
the  kingdom  off  God  in  them  selues,  «fe  especiallie  in  their  charge  k 
household,  iff  thei  had  anie,  or  in  their  freindes  &  companions 
&  whosoeuer  Vvas  Vvorthie.  Furthermore  thei  particularlie  agreed 
off  the  manner,  howe  to  Vvatch  to  disorders,  &  reforme  abuses, 
&  for  assembling  the  companie,  for  teaching  priuatlie,  ife  for  warning 
and  rebukeing  both  priuatly  &  openlie,  for  appointing  publick 
humbling  in  more  rare  judgementes,  and  publik  thankesgeuing  in 
straunger  blessinges,  for  gathering  &  testifiing  voices  in  debating 
matters,  &  propounding  them  in  the  name  off  the  rest  that  agree,  for 
an  order  of  chosing  teachers,  guides  &  releeuers,  when  thei  want, 
for  separating  cleane  from  vncleane,  for  receauing  anie  into  the 
felloweship,  for  presenting  the  dailie  successe  of  the  church,  &  the 
wantes  thereof,  for  seeking  to  other  churches  to  haue  their  help, 
being  better  reformed,  or  to  bring  them  to  reformation,  for  taking 
an  order  that  none  contend  openlie,  nor  persecute,  nor  trouble  dis- 
orderedly,  nor  bring  false  doctrine,  nor  euil  cause  after  once  or  twise 
Vvarning  or  rebuke. 

Thus  all  things  were  handled,  set  in  order,  &  agreed  on  to  the 
comfort  off  all,  &  soe  the  matter  wrought  k  prospered  by  the  good 
hand  of  God . , . ' 

From  this  passage  we  see  how  complete  the  organization  of 
the  congregation  was  for  that  early  date,  and  how  carefully  all 
matters  relating  thereto  had  been  thought  out.  At  the  time  of 
organization  Browne  has  been  said  to  have  been  chosen  pastor, 
and  Harrison  teacher,  and  it  is  possible  that  this  was  the  case, 
though  the  writer  in  his  study  of  the  primary  sources  has  not 
seen  any  direct  statement  that  the  titles  of  pastor  and  teacher 
were  used  at  that  time.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  members 
of  the  church  prayed  for  the  "  watchfulnes  &  diligence "  of 
their  teachers,  and,  what  seems  a  little  unusual,  "promised 
their  obedience  "  to  them,  though  opportunity  was  also  to  be 
given  to  the  members  of  the  congregation  to  "  protest,  appeale, 
complaine,  exhort,  dispute,  reproue  &c."  The  officers  of  this 
company  as  first  fully  organized  apparently  were  not  styled 
pastor,  teacher,  elders,  and  deacons,  as  might  have  been  sup- 
posed, but  "teachers,  guides  &  releeuers".     In  "A  Trve  and 

1  "A  Trve  and  Short  Declaration",  pp.  19-20. 

7—3 


100  Early  English  Dissenters 

Short  Declaration  "  Browne  does  not  speak  of  himself  as  pastor 
until  he  describes  "  the  Breach  and  Diuision  which  fell  amongst 
the  companie "  in  Middelburg.  Then  he  makes  use  of  that 
title  several  times.     He  never  speaks  of  Harrison  as  teacher. 

It  was  apparently  after  the  company  at  Norwich  had  been 
organized  that  Browne  made  journeys  into  the  neighbouring 
towns  and  country,  evidently  preaching  fiercely  against  the 
Bishops.  About  April  19,  1581,  he  seems  to  have  been  first 
apprehended  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bury  St  Edmunds  by  the 
Bishop  of  Norwich.  This  action  was  taken  on  the  complaint  of 
"many  godly  [Puritan]  preachers".  His  audience  is  said  to 
have  numbered  a  hundred  persons  at  a  time  and  met,  not  with 
the  congregations  of  the  Puritan  preachers,  but  "  in  privat 
bowses  &  conventicles. . .,  not  without  danger  of  some  yll  event ". 
He  is  reported  by  the  Bishop  to  have  taught  "straunge  and 
daungerous  doctrine,  in  all  disordered  manner",  and  to  have 
"greatlie  troubled  the  whole  Cuntrie,  and  broughte  manie  to 
greate  disobedience  of  all  lawe  and  magistrates  ".  However,  the 
"  Chefest  of  such  factions  were  so  bridled,  and  the  rest  of  their 
followers  so  greatlie  dismaied  ",  that  the  Bishop  had  good  reason 
to  hope  that  quiet  would  ensue. 

No  wonder  the  Puritans  felt  envious,  for  at  least  some  of 
Browne's  hearers  evidently  were  little  more  than  Puritans  at 
heart,  as  is  suggested  by  the  fact  that  when  Browne  was  in 
prison  at  London,  the  "  companie "  were  in  favour  of  going 
to  Scotland,  the  home  of  Presbyterianism.  He  was  obliged  to 
dissuade  them  from  such  a  course.  They  then  wished  to  go 
to  Jersey  or  Guernsey,  where  Cartwright  and  Edmund  Snape 
in  1576  had  acted  as  advisers  in  completing  the  Presbyterian 
organization  of  the  churches  in  those  islands^  Again  Browne 
had  to  urge  his  followers  not  to  be  in  too  great  haste  to  leave 
England. 

Probably  on  the  way  back  from  his  imprisonment  in  London 
Browne  again  passed  near,  or  through,  Bury  St  Edmunds,  and 
about  August  2,  1581,  he  was  imprisoned  once  more  by  the 

*  See  Mr  E.  le  Brun's  article  in  the  "Transactions"  of  the  Congre- 
gational Historical  Society  (for  May,  1907,  pp.  110-13),  entitled,  "Puritans 
and  Presbyterians  in  the  Channel  Islands  ". 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation       101 

Bishop  of  Norwich.  This  time  Browne  is  reported  to  have  held 
"  priuate  meetinges  in  such  Close  and  secrett  manner  "  that  the 
Bishop  did  not  know  how  to  stop  them  and  had  to  write  to 
Burghley  for  "  helpe  in  suppressinge  him  ",  so  that  no  further 
harm  might  come  to  his  Diocese,  which  he  had  mistakenly 
imagined  had  already  been  brought  into  a  state  of  repose. 
Browne  was  now  apparently  once  more  imprisoned  with  other 
leading  members  of  the  congregation,  while  the  position  of  those 
not  in  prison  was  made  so  precarious,  that  finally  they  all  agreed 
it  was  time  for  them  to  leave  England. 

Thus  ends  the  first  stage  in  the  development  of  Browne's 
congregation.  It  consisted  largely  of  ardent  criticism  of  the 
bishops  and  of  the  condition  of  the  Church  of  England,  though 
of  course  some  constructive  effort  must  also  have  been  exercised 
in  organizing  the  "  companie  ". 

II. 

The  next  stage  of  Brownist  separation  is  to  be  studied  at 
Middelburg,  Zealand,  whither  the  congregation  appears  to  have 
removed  about  January,  1581/2.  This  was  the  experimental 
stage,  the  period  of  trial  and  failure,  but  also  of  literary  pro- 
ductivity on  the  part  of  Browne  and  of  Harrison.  Here 
appeared  Browne's  now  well-known  work,  composed  in  its 
final  form  of  three  parts,  bearing  the  general  title,  "  A  Booke  | 
WHICH  SHEWETH  THE  \  life  and  manners  of  all  true 
Christians,  \  and  howe  vnlike  they  are  vnto  Turkes  and  Papistes  | 
and  Heathen  folke.  |  ...  Middelbvrgh  ",  4°,  1582.  In  the  first 
section  or  work,  "  A  Treatise  of  reformation  without  tarying  for 
anie,...",  Browne  shows  himself  to  believe  in  separation,  not  as 
an  end  in  itself,  but  rather  as  a  means  towards  the  ideal  end 
of  producing  a  true  Church  of  England,  which  should  be  un- 
fettered by  Prince,  Privy  Council,  Parliament,  or  magistrate, 
and  the  members  of  which  should  be  raised  to  a  state  of  all 
possible  perfection.  He  evidently  was  not  thinking  of  per- 
manent separation,  but  of  using  temporary  separation  as  a 
means  of  ultimately  benefiting  the  condition  of  the  State 
Church,  to  which,  no  doubt,  he  hoped  to  return.  He  separated 
because  he  believed  that  evil  men  should  not  be  members  of 


102  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  church,  and  if  they  might  not  be  separated  from  it  then  he 
himself  would  separate,  but  it  does  not  appear  at  all  certain 
that  he  ever  at  that  time  contemplated  such  lasting  separation 
as  followed  his  action,  has  steadily  increased  in  influence,  and 
remains  to  this  day  a  practically  permanent  element  in  English 
religious  life. 

The  second  section,  which  was  probably  written  last  of  the 
three,  "J.  Treatise  vpon  the  23.  of  Mat\th.ewe",  is  the  most 
scathing  of  all  Browne's  writings.  Its  purpose,  as  expressed  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  title,  is  to  encourage  people  in  "  avoiding 
the  Popish  disorders,  and  ungodly  communion  of  all  false  chris- 
tians and  especially  of  wicked  Preachers  and  hirelings".  Its 
direct  influence  is  therefore  towards  separation,  and  people  are 
even  urged,  if  possible  to  flee  from  England,  since  the  bishops 
are  opposed  to  reformation  of  the  Church,  which  is  described 
as  full  of  "  Popishe  disorders  ".  Browne  as  usual  most  savagely 
attacks  the  bishops.  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  even  Robert 
Harrison  did  not  like  this  treatise  but  calls  it  "  a  pattern  of  all 
lewde  frantike  disorder"*. 

The  third  treatise  has  a  separate  title-page,  much  like  the 
first,  and  is  the  most  sober  and  constructive  part  of  the  work. 
Here  Browne  unfolds  his  views  on  Church  Polity.  Hitherto 
I  have  always  considered  that  this  section  of  "  A  Booke  which 
Sheweth"  was  distinctly  a  work  for  (separatist)  Congrega- 
tionalists  in  the  modern  sense,  and  was,  as  it  were,  a  (sepa- 
ratist) Congregational  Church  Polity,  but  after  a  very  careful 
and  critical  examination  of  the  book  I  have  been  to  my  surprise 
unable  to  find  the  slightest  indication  that  Browne  wrote  this 
especially  for  the  use  of  his  own  separatist  congregation,  or  even 
for  other  separatist  congregations  like  it.  His  idea  seems  to 
have  been  much  broader  than  that.  The  work  in  reality  unfolds 
what  appears  to  have  been  his  ideal  of  a  true  Church  Polity  for 
the  use  of  the  people  of  England  in  reforming  the  Church  of 
England  !  It  does  not,  therefore,  offer  an  ideal  for  his  own  con- 
gregation alone,  for  separatists  in  general,  or  for  a  permanent 

1  See  a  citation  from  Harrison's  letter  to  some  one  in  London  published 
in  S.  B.[redwell]'s  "THE  RASING  |  OF  THE  FOVNDATIONS  |  of 
Brovvnisme... ",  London,  4",  1588  [1589],  p.  xii. 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation       103 

separation.  This  treatise  may  indeed  be  called  the  outline  of  a 
"  spiritual  and  ecclesiastical  Utopia",  but  it  cannot  properly  be 
spoken  of  as  a  Utopia  which  Browne's  church  failed  to  realize, 
for  it  was  never  intended  as  a  one  congregation  Utopia,  or  even 
as  a  general  Congregational  (separatist)  Utopia. 

In  this  general  English  ecclesiastical  Utopia  which  Browne 
planned,  Archbishops,  Deans,  Canons,  and  other  unbiblical 
officials  are  to  have  no  place,  and  even  the  odious  name  of 
bishop  is  not  to  be  used.  Everything  is  to  be  regulated  by  the 
people  for  the  benefit  of  the  people.  Even  the  magistrates  are 
to  hold  their  positions  only  by  the  will  and  choice  of  the  people. 
The  people,  and  not  the  officers,  constitute  the  church,  they 
appoint  the  officers  and  on  sufficient  reason  have  the  right  at 
any  time  to  remove  them  from  office.  A  church  is  a  single 
congregation  which  is  under  the  immediate  leadership  of  Christ 
and  by  his  direct  guidance  is  able  in  general  to  regulate  its  own 
affairs,  though  in  especially  important  matters  it  may  consult 
the  opinion  of  other  congregations,  or  of  a  Synod  composed  of 
members — not  necessarily  elders — of  many  churches.  In  each 
congregation  those  who  are  "  forwardest  and  wysest "  are  ap- 
parently to  be  chosen  by  the  people  as  elders,  and  the  elders  of 
a  particular  congregation  acting  in  conjunction  form  the  Elder- 
ship, whose  duty  it  is  to  give  redress  and  counsel.  The  people 
choose  the  other  officers  as  well  as  the  elders,  but  the  elders 
ordain  the  pastor  with  imposition  of  hands,  though  such  im- 
position is  not  absolutely  essential.  Browne  mentions  eight 
classes  of  officers,  as  those  of  Apostle,  Prophet,  and  Evangelist, 
whom  he  groups  in  a  division  apart  from  the  classes  of  "Pastour  ", 
Teacher,  Elders,  "  Releeuers "  or  Deacons,  and  Widows.  The 
elders  collect  the  votes  when  the  congregation  is  electing  its 
other  officers.  Discipline  is  to  be  employed  for  the  redress  of 
abuses,  but  the  expression  "  to  give  over  to  Satan  "  does  not 
appear.  The  whole  church  is  the  ultimate  authority  in  ad- 
ministering discipline,  but  the  elders  are  to  attend  to  minor 
cases.  The  above  appear  to  be  the  principal  views  expressed 
in  "A  Booke  which  Sheweth". 

The  question  may  naturally  be  asked  here.  Would  not  the 
prosecution  of  such  a  plan  only  have  involved  all  the  people  of 


104  Early  English  Dissenter's 

England  in  a  species  of  separatism  (even  more  marked  than 
that  of  to-day),  in  which  church-individualism  would  have  been 
developed  to  such  an  extent  that  there  would  have  been  no  church 
unity  except  in  so  far  as  each  church  would  be  under  the  direct 
control  of  Christ  ?  How  then  would  these  churches  be  any  less 
separatist  than  are  modern  Congregational  churches,  or  in  other 
words.  How  can  Browne  have  intended  that  there  should  be  any 
State  Church  resulting  from  such  a  plan,  or  where  in  his  scheme 
is  any  element  of  unification  to  be  discovered  ? 

Such  questions  are  pertinent,  and  certainly  the  answer  is 
not  too  clearly  delineated  in  the  third  treatise  of  "A  Booke 
which  Sheweth".  In  fact,  the  realization  of  Browne's  hopes  for 
an  ecclesiastical  Utopia  in  England  probably  seemed  so  far 
distant  at  that  time,  that  he  had  as  yet  not  clearly  thought  out 
all  the  practical  difficulties  which  would  naturally  arise  in 
putting  his  views  into  practice.  However,  I  think  we  can  find 
in  the  three  treatises  of  his  first  book  taken  together  some 
elements  which  may  aid  us  in  answering  the  above  questions. 

In  my  opinion,  Browne  had  no  intention  of  instituting  any 
permanent  separation  of  all  churches  from  one  another.  The 
idea  of  a  State  Church  doubtless  seemed  to  him  as  desirable  as 
to  any  other  English  citizen.  He  would  not  destroy  or  secularize 
the  churches  because  of  any  connection  which  they  may  formerly 
have  had  with  Rome.  He  would  undoubtedly  have  used  the 
Parish  church  buildings,  practically  as  they  stood,  for  his 
congregational  churches,  as  any  Puritans  of  the  time  would 
probably  have  wished  to  do.  He  even  mentions  Synods  as  a 
justifiable  means  of  settling  unusual  difficulties  in  the  churches. 
Such  Synods,  of  course,  would  have  formed  some  bond  of  union 
between  the  different  congregations,  but  in  his  congregational 
system  Synods  are  not  especially  emphasized.  We  must,  there- 
fore, look  further  for  a  satisfactory  solution  of  the  problem. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  Browne  makes  little  particular  mention 
of  the  civil  magistrate  in  the  third  treatise,  but  in  the  first, 
"  A  Treatise  of  Reformation ",  he  defines  the  relation  of  the 
magistrate  to  the  Church  in  the  following  words^ :  "  We  knowe 

1  Rev.  T.  G.  Crippen's  edition,  London,  1903,  pp.  26-7. 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation      105 

that  Moses  might  reforme,  and  the  iudges  and  Kings  which 
followed  him,  and  so  may  our  Magistrates  :  yea  they  may  reforme 
the  Church  and  commaunde  things  expedient  for  the  same. 
Yet  may  they  doo  nothing  concerning  the  Church,  but  onelie 
ciuile,  and  as  ciuile  Magistrates,  that  is,  they  haue  not 
that  authoritie  ouer  the  Church,  as  to  be  Prophetes  or  Priestes, 
or  spiritual  Kings,  as  in  all  outwarde  Justice,  to  maintain 
the  right  welfare  and  honor  thereof,  with  outward  power, 
bodily  punishment,  &  ciuil  forcing  of  men.  And  therfore 
also  because  the  church  is  in  a  common  wealth,  it  is  of  their 
charge :  that  is  concerning  the  outward  prouision  and  outward 
iustice,  they  are  to  look  to  it,  but  to  compell  religion,  to  plant 
churches  by  power,  and  to  force  a  submission  to  Ecclesiastical 
goueniement  by  lawes  &  penalties  belongeth  not  to  them,...". 
May  it  not  be  then,  that  even  at  this  period,  Browne  felt  that 
the  poAver  of  the  civil  magistrate  was  one  great  force,  which, 
when  properly  limited,  might  be  used  as  a  means  of  keeping  the 
churches  under  state  control,  and  so  of  ensuring  in  them  a 
reasonable  amount  of  unity  in  belief  and  practice'  ? 

After  the  breach  between  Browne  and  Harrison  in  1583, 
Harrison  undertook  to  expound  his  views  in  two  books,  which 
are,  however,  much  less  important  than  those  of  Browne.  One 
of  them  may  have  been  produced  to  counteract  the  influence  of 
Browne's  publication,  perhaps  also  to  give  peaceable  people  a 
more  sober  view  of  the  opinions  of  early  English  separatism. 
The  first  of  these  two  books  was  "A  LITTLE  |  TREATISE 
vppon  the  firste  \  Verse  of  the  122.  Psalm.  ]  Stirring  vp  vnto 
carefuU  |  desiring  &  dutifuU  labou*|  nw^/or  true  church  \  Gouerne- 
ment.  |  ...  |  1583."  In  the  following  passage  from  the  Epistle 
"  To  all  our  Christian  Brethren  in  Englande,..."^  Harrison  gives 
an  account  of  his  experiences  in  separatism,  and  his  reasons  for 
writing  this  book  : — 

MY  state  is  known   vnto  mania  of  you... how  that  of  certaine 
time... I  haue  striuen,  and  withstood  the  yoke  of  spiritual 
bondage  in  the  worshippe  of  God, . .  .From  the  which  that  I  might  bee 

*  Browne's  view  of  the  usefulness  of  civil  magistrates  is  made  more 
evident  in  "  A  New  Years  Guift ",  as  will  be  seen  in  the  first  note  in  the 
next  chapter  (iv.). 

^  Pp.  iii-v. 


106  Early  English  Dissenters 

deliuered  (the  Lorde  God  the  searcher  of  heartes  I  take  to  records) 
that  it  haue  bene  myne  onlie  quarrel,  and  the  cause  of  stirring  me 
vp  to  do  that,  which  I  did.  Concerning  the  whiche  cause,  I  did  not 
thinke  it  lawefull  for  mee  (though  I  coulde  haue  escaped  in  tyme 
ynough)  to  withdraw  my  selfe  into  any  other  place,  for  myne  owne 
liberties  sake,  vntill  I  had  more  openly  witnessed  the  same  cause, 
which  when  it  seemed  good  vnto  God,  that  I  with  some  others 
should  doo,  by  abyding  imprisonment  a  certayne  time  :  Then  hauing 
offered  our  selues  to  suffer  whatsoeuer  our  vexers  should  lay  vpon  vs, 
and  espyinge  nothing  like  to  be  done  vnto  vs,  but  to  bee  holden  with 
lingering  imprisonement,  and  that  without  libertie  of  communicating 
vnto  others  the  instruction  of  the  same  cause,  which  we  professed  : 
we  thought  good  rather  to  vndergoe  some  exile  (as  it  were)  for 
redeeming  at  least  some  libertie  of  worshipping  God  with  safetie  of 
conscience,  which  when  we  did,  and  diuers  of  our  Brethren,  which 
were  willing  to  come  vnto  vs  were  restrayned  :  and  we  were  per- 
suaded, that  to  retui'ne  vnto  them  thither,  whereas  by  imprisonment 
we  should  againe  be  holden  from  them,  would  little  auayle :  I  haue 
iudged  that  we  haue  bene  debters  to  them  to  bestow  vpon  them 
some  thing  which  might  helpe  to  increase  their  spirituall  courage 
and  comfort.  In  which  behalf e,  when  the  expectation  of  me  and 
diuers  others  rested  vpon  some,  who  in  the  ende  did  but  slenderlie 
answere,  and  satisfie  the  same :  Then  I,  which  for  my  vnworthines 
and  poore  gifte,  hadde  thought  neuer  to  haue  set  foorth  any  thinge 
publikely,  yet  was  prouoked  to  indeuour  my  selfe,  in  some  parte,  as 
farr  as  the  Lord  should  make  me  able,  to  satisfie  that  want,  which 
I  thought  to  be  great.  And  I  went  about  a  piece  of  work  touching 
Church  gouernement.  But  partlie  by  sicknes,  &  partly  by  weying 
the  cost  of  the  print,  and  findinge  it  to  be  aboue  my  reache  of  abilitie  : 
I  was  hindered,  and  haue  let  staye  that  worke,  vntill  the  Lorde 
further  inable  mee. 

In  the  meane  tyme  I  thought  good  to  write  some  other  little 
treatse  [sic]  and  I  chose  this  122.  Psalme, . . .  Agayne,  sicknes  and  other 
causes  cutting  me  short :  I  was  constreined  to  ende  at  this  time 
skarce  finishing  the  firste  verse.... 

Harrison  has  the  following  veiled  reference  to  Robert 
Browne : — 

And  of  late  an  other  attempt  haue  bene  giuen  that  waie  by  one 
of  whom  I  must  needs  sale,  that  the  Lord  vsed  him  as  a  meanes  to 
bringe  the  trueth  to  light,  in  manie  points  concerning  the  true 
gouernement  of  the  Churche  :  who,  I  wish  for  the  glorie  of  God, 
if  it  had  ben  his  good  pleasure,  that  he  had  stoode  in  integrity, 
without  swaruing  and  leaninge  to  Antichristian  pride,  and  bitternes. 
And  for  me  to  make  thereof,  may  seme  very  hard,  which  am  not  so 
able  therin  to  saue  my  self  from  the  reproch  of  manie  tongues,  as 
I  am  to  cleare  my  selfe  of  the  deseruing  the  same...^ 

^  Sig.  D2  verso. 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation      107 

Perhaps  on  account  of  the  necessity  of  securing  a  new  pastor 
to  take  the  place  made  vacant  by  Browne's  departure,  the  ques- 
tion of  succession  in  the  ministry  seems  to  have  been  prominent 
in  Harrison's  mind  when  he  wrote  this  book,  for  he  says^: — 

And  moreouer,  whereas  they  tie  the  Ordination  of  euerie 
Minister,  as  it  were,  vnto  the  girdle  of  other  Ministers,  that  of 
necessitie  it  must  at  all  times  depende  and  stale  vppon  them  :  that 
is  to  laie  a  greater  bondage  vpon  y*  churches,  then  they  are  able  to 
beare.  For  admitt  there  be  onelie  one  church  in  a  nation,  and  they 
want  a  pastour :  must  they  seeke  ouer  Sea  and  lande,  to  gett  a 
minister  ordained  by  other  ministers '{  But  what  if  there  shoulde 
be  but  only  one  apparent  to  vs  in  the  world  :  shall  that  church 
for  euer  be  depriued,  after  they  haue  once  wanted  a  minister,  for 
default  of  authoritie  to  call  and  ordaine  an  other?  By  this  reason, 
euery  church  should  not  be  perfect  in  it  selfe,  nor  haue  in  it  selfe 
meanes  and  power  to  continue  by  that  measure  of  lines  which  the 
Lord  haue  measured  out  vnto  it.  And  is  it  not  a  dishonour  to 
Chi-ist  lesus  the  head  of  euery  congregation,  which  is  his  bodie :  to 
say  that  his  body  together  with  the  heade,  is  not  able  to  be  sustained 
and  preserued  in  it  selfe  ? 

It  appears  from  these  citations  that  Harrison  had  been 
preparing  for  the  press  a  work  "  touching  Church  gouernement", 
but  that  he  had  been  constrained  to  give  it  up  until  a  more 
favourable  time.  This  undertaking  he  seems  never  to  have 
carried  out,  although  he  published  a  small  pamphlet  of  sixty- 
four  pages  in  1583  (i.e.,  before  March  25, 1584)  entitled,  "Three 
Formes  of  Catechismes,  conteyning  the  most  principal!  pointes 
of  Religion." 

Before,  or  just  after,  Browne  left  Middelburg  it  seems 
probable  that  he  also  published  "A  Trve  and  Short  Declara- 
tion". This  is  an  exceedingly  important  autobiographical 
writing,  and  the  preservation  of  a  single  copy  of  it  has  greatly 
helped  in  the  final  reconstruction  of  his  life  and  in  making 
plain  his  early  aims.  It  clearly  shows  that  his  motives  were 
good  and  awakens  in  the  reader  a  sympathy  for  him  in  his 
troubles.  This  work  shows  further  that  Browne  had  developed 
strong  separatist  convictions  before  he  left  Holland-. 

Having    examined    the    works    of    Browne   and   Harrison 

1  Sig.  Eg  recto. 

2  This  point  should  be  kept  in  mind  in  order  that  it  may  be  contrasted 
later  with  Browne's  opinions  as  set  forth  in  his  "  Retractation  ". 


108  Early  English  Dissenters 

produced  during  the  years  1582  and  1583/4  we  may  now  briefly 
turn  to  certain  points  in  the  history  of  their  church  during  that 
period.  In  the  first  place,  it  now  appears  unlikely  that  Browne's 
congregation  on  its  arrival  in  Middelburg  joined  Cartwright's 
church,  for,  as  we  shall  see  later,  Cartwright  probably  had  not 
yet  arrived  in  that  city ;  or  that  after  Browne's  departure 
Harrison  and  the  remnant  with  him  joined  it.  It  seems  much 
more  likely  that  Cartwright  in  his  letter  to  Harrison^  means 
that  Browne's  company  had  once  been  Puritans  and  members  of 
the  Church  of  England,  but  had  become  separatists,  and  that 
he  had  hoped  they  would  now  return  to  the  Church  of  England 
by  joining  his  congregation  in  Middelburg. 

As  to  the  explicit  statement  made  by  Dr  R.  W.  Dale*  that 
sixty  of  the  company  in  Norwich  came  to  Holland  with  Browne 
and  Harrison,  it  seems  more  reasonable  to  believe  that  the 
Middelburg  congregation,  even  at  its  maximum  size,  can  hardly 
have  comprised  more  than  thirty  or  forty  persons.  In  the  first 
place,  Harrison  suggests  that  not  all  the  church  in  Norwich 
went  to  Holland,  but  that  "  diners "  were  "  restreyned ",  and 
that  the  leaders,  who  had  succeeded  in  reaching  Middelburg, 
thought  it  would  be  of  little  use  to  return  to  England  on  their 
account.  In  the  second  place,  the  whole  congregation  in  Nor- 
wich after  so  brief  an  existence  and  amidst  ever  increasing 
dangers  can  hardly  have  numbered  more  than  sixty  people. 
Again,  Browne  himself  tells  us  that  the  congregation  in  Middel- 
burg met  in  his  chamber,  which  in  his  circumstances,  one  would 
think,  could  hardly  have  been  large  enough  to  accommodate  so 
many.  Finally,  Browne  never  represents  the  congregation  as  at 
all  large.  He  names  the  following  persons  in  "A  Trve  and 
Short  Declaration  "  as  members  of  the  Middelburg  congrega- 
tion,— Robert  Browne  (the  pastor)  and  his  wife ;  Robert  Harri- 
son, his  sister,  and  probably  his  brother,  William  Harrison; 
Charles  Munneman  or  Moneman(Moneyman?);  John  Chandler*; 

»  Published  in  Robert  Browne's  "An  Ausvvere  to  Ma.|STER  CART- 
WRIGHT  HIS  I  LETTER  FOR  lOYNING  with  the  English  Churches: 
..."[1585?],  4°. 

2  In  his  "  History  of  English  Congregationalism  ",  1907,  p.  125. 

^  John  Chandler  and  his  wife  Alice  became  members  of  John  Green- 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation       109 

and  Tobie  Henson.  Most  of  these  were  Browne's  opponents, 
and  he  gives  the  names  of  none  of  his  supporters  except  that  of 
his  wife,  but  when  he  left  Middelburg  we  know  that  there  went 
"  in  companie  with  him  4,  or  5  englishmen  and  their  wives,  and 
fameleis"^  Even  such  a  slight  withdrawal  probably  made  a 
considerable  decrease  in  the  size  of  the  congregation. 

This  estimate  is  of  course  contrary  to  the  testimony  of  the 
following  passage  in  Dr  Edward  Stillingfleet's  "The  Unreason- 
ableness of  Separation . .  .^•. — 

When  those  who  were  called  Brownists,  from  the  freer  Exercise 
of  their  new  Church  way,  withdrew  into  the  Low-Coicntreys,  they 
immediately  fell  into  strange  Factions  and  Divisions  among  them- 
selves. A.D.  1582.  Robert  Brouni,  accompanied  with  Harrison 
a  School-Master,  and  about  50  or  60  Persons,  went  over  to  Middle- 
burgh,  and  there  they  chose  Harrison  Pastor,  and  Brown  Teacher. 
They  had  not  been  there  Three  Months,  but  upon  the  falling  out 
between  Brown  and  Harrison,  Brown  forsakes  them,  and  returns 
for  England,  and  Subscribes,  promising  to  the  Archbishop,  To  live 
Obediently  to  his  Commands. 

But  Dr  Stillingfleet's  work  was  not  first  published  until 
1681,  and  no  copy  of  the  book  from  which  he  is  supposed  to 
have  gathered  his  information  has  yet  been  discovered.  Further- 
more, even  this  source  was  not  written  until  about  fifty  years 
after  the  events  described.  It  will  be  noticed  that  Stilling- 
fleet  does  not,  like  Dr  Dale,  say  that  60  people  accompanied 
Browne,  but  "about  50  or  60  Persons".  This  estimate  appears 
to  be  nearer  the  truth  than  Dr  Dale's,  but  even  this  is  probably 
not  perfectly  accurate,  though  we  might  more  easily  accept  it 
if  we  could  be  sure  that  the  rest  of  the  statements  in  the 
above-cited  passage  were  correct.  There  are,  however,  at  least 
two  points  in  it  to  be  seriously  questioned,  for  we  know  from 
"  A  Trve  and  Short  Declaration "  that  Browne's  congregation 

wood's  congregation  in  London  in  1587  and  were  taken  prisoners  on  Oct.  8 
of  that  year.  John  Chandler  died  in  the  Poultry  Counter,  London,  before 
May,  1589,  leaving  his  widow  and  eight  children.  She  was  released  from 
prison  on  bail  after  his  death. 

1  See  "  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne",  Oxford  and  London,  1906, 
p.  28. 

2  P.  48.  The  facts  presented  in  this  passage  are  taken  from  "  Stephen 
OflFwood's  Advertisement  to  John  De  lecluse  and  H.  May,  p.  10,  39".  This 
was  published  in,  or  probably  not  long  before,  1633. 


110  Early  English  Dissenters 

chose  their  officers  in  Norwich,  not  at  Middelburg,  and  that 
Harrison  was  certainly  not  elected  pastor  while  Browne  was  in 
Middelburg.  These  two  inaccuracies  are  sufficient  to  make  us 
question  any  other  unwarranted  affirmations  in  this  passage. 

The  dissensions  in  Browne's  church  are  already  familiar  to 
students,  as  well  as  the  fact  that  Mrs  Browne  was  at  least 
partly  their  cause,  but  there  is  one  point  related  to  these 
troubles,  which  may  not  have  been  previously  noticed,  namely 
that  the  "  ado "  about  Mrs  Browne  seems  to  have  been  con- 
cerned with  "  the  power  &  authoritie  which  the  Husband 
hath  ouer  the  Wife"*.  Here  then  in  Middelburg  evidently 
began  Browne's  matrimonial  troubles,  which  appear  to  have 
embittered  him  during  the  greater  part  of  his  married  life.  In 
fact,  there  is  a  further  passage  in  "A  Booke  which  Sheweth"'^ 
which  may  throw  considerable  light  on  Browne's  marital 
difficulties  at  Achurch.  This  section  discusses  the  covenant 
between  husband  and  wife  and  draws  a  distinction  between 
what  he  calls  the  covenant  of  communion  of  marriage  and  the 
covenant  of  communion  of  government,  and  states  that  if  one 
party  in  marriage  insists  on  holding  to  a  false  religion  the 
other  may  depart  from  the  first  and  not  be  held  in  bondage. 

One  other  point  ought  to  be  mentioned  here,  namely, 
that  Harrison  thought  he  had  certain  real  grievances  against 
Browne  during  the  latter's  sojourn  in  Middelburg.  In  a  letter 
written  to  some  one  in  London  Harrison  says  with  a  good  deal 
of  bitterness' : — 

In  deede  the  Lorde  hath  made  a  hreache  amongst  vs,  for  our 
sinnes  haue  made  vs  vnworthie  to  heare  his  great  and  woorthie  cause. 
M.  B.  [rowne]  hath  cast  vs  off,  and  that  with  the  open  manifesting  of  so 
many  and  so  notable  treacheries,  as  I  abhorre  to  tell,  and  if  I  should 
declare  them,,  you  could  not  beleeue  me.  Which  because  this  sheete  and 
many  moe  wotdd  not  suffice  to  rehearse,  I  will  meddle  with  no  par- 
ticular thing,  to  declare  it.  Onely  this  I  testifie  vnto  you,  I  am  well 
able  to  proue,  that  Caine  dealt  not  so  ill  with  his  brother  Abel,  as  he 
hath  dealt  with  me.  Againe  towards  the  ende  of  that  letter,  hee 
writeth  thus.  Also  I  would  admonish  you  to  take  heede  howe  you 
aduenture  your  selfe  to  be  a  meane,  to  spread  abroade  any  of  that 

»  In  "  A  Trve  and  Short  Declaration  ". 
^  Sig.  Kg  verso. 

3  In  S.  B.[redwelljs  "THE  RASING  |  OF  THE  FOVNDATIONS  \ 
of  Brownisme  ",  1588,  p.  xii. 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congi'egation      111 

parties  bookes,  except  it  tvere  more  tending  to  the  glorie  of  God  then  it 
is.  For  in  the  first  hooke  there  is  manifolde  heresie :  and  the  other 
vpon  the  23.  of  Matthewe,  is  a  patterne  of  all  lewde  frantike  dis- 
order, whoso  haue  eyes  to  see  it.  And  I  do  not  doubt  but  that  the 
Lord  will  yet  driue  him  on  to  worse  and  worse,... 

Undoubtedly  there  were  two  sides  to  this  controversy  and 
probably  Browne  as  well  as  Harrison  should  be  blamed  for  the 
troubles  in  Middelburg.  Indeed,  if  Browne  had  not  written 
"  A  Trve  and  Short  Declaration  "  one  might  be  inclined  to  take 
sides  entirely  with  Harrison,  but  in  that  little  autobiographical 
writing  Browne  states  his  case  so  clearly  and  openly  as  to  arouse 
sympathy  for  him  in  a  contest  in  which,  if  he  made  mistakes, 
he  had  few  to  befriend  him  and  help  his  cause.  George  John- 
son evidently  did  not  sympathize  with  Browne's  defence  of  him- 
self, but  people  to-day  will  probably  take  Browne's  part.  We 
may  indeed  deplore  these  internal  dissensions  in  the  church,  and 
wish  that  they  might  have  been  avoided,  but  the  Middelburg 
congregation  like  that  of  the  Marian  exiles  at  Frankfort,  seems 
to  have  become  a  veritable  hornet's  nest. 

III. 

On  leaving  Middelburg,  as  is  well  known,  Browne  journeyed 
to  Scotland,  where  he  arrived  early  in  January,  1583/4.  Here 
he  seems  to  have  remained  for  some  months.  He  still  main- 
tained his  separatist  ideas,  for  his  "  companie  "  is  said  to  have 
"  held  opiniotin  of  separatiotin  from  all  kirks  where  excommuni- 
catioun  wes  not  rigorously  vsed  against  open  offenders,  not  re- 
penting", but  though  the  Kirk  interfered  with  the  freedom  of 
his  movements,  the  King,  apparently  in  order  to  spite  the  Kirk, 
for  which  he  never  had  much  liking,  seems  not  to  have  molested 
him.  However,  while  Browne  saw  much  of  Scotland,  he  certainly 
spent  some  time  in  prison,  for  in  writing  his  reminiscences  of 
his  Scottish  visit  in  "  A  New  Years  Guift "  five  years  later,  he 
says :  "  in  Scotland,  the  preachers  hauing  no  names  of  byshops 
did  imprison  me  more  wrongfully  then  anie  Bishop  would  haue 
done"^  That  his  imprisonment  was  not  brief  may  perhaps  be 
inferred  from  the  aversion  with  which  he  speaks  of  the  Presby- 
terians' "  Lordlie  Discipline  ". 

1  P.  27  of  the  edition  published  at  Memorial  Hall,  London,  in  1904. 


112  Early  English  Dissenters 

Indeed,  Browne  may  first  have  begun  in  Scotland  really  to 
dislike  Presbyterianism.  Before  that  time,  to  be  sure,  he  had 
become  aware  that  those  who  had  caused  his  earlier  imprison- 
ments were  Puritans.  But  now  he  began  to  understand  what 
a  fully  developed  Puritanism  would  mean,  and  to  see  that 
hidden  under  this  gentle  title  lurked  a  tyranny  less  tolerant 
even  than  that  of  his  old  foes,  the  bishops. 

As  to  Browne's  success  in  disseminating  his  opinions  in 
Scotland  very  little  can  be  said.  The  Scotch  mind  was  at 
that  time  even  less  prepared  than  the  English  for  innovations 
in  religion,  and  though  King  James  speaks  in  the  preface  of  his 
"BASIAIKON  AHPON",  London,  1603,  as  if  he  was  ex- 
ceedingly sorry  that  Browne  ever  came  to  Scotland  to  sow  his 
"  popple  "  and  to  leave  "  schollers  behinde  "  him,  there  appears 
to  be  no  reliable  evidence  whatever  that  Browne's  religious 
propaganda  made  any  lasting  impression  in  Scotland,  and  it  is 
to  be  presumed  that  none  of  his  followers  found  it  worth  while 
to  remain  in  that  country  in  order  to  complete  any  work  he 
may  have  begun. 

IV. 

When  Browne  crossed  the  Scottish  border  on  his  way  to 
Stamford,  he  must  have  felt  that  he  was  once  more  entering  a 
free  land.  However,  his  stay  in  that  town  at  this  time  was 
apparently  brief.  Whether  he  ever  visited  Norwich  again  is 
not  known.  Such  a  return  would  have  been  natural,  for  here, 
as  we  learn  from  the  testimony  of  Robert  Harrison,  some  of 
Browne's  congregation  had  been  restrained,  and  it  is  to  be  re- 
membered that  up  to  this  time  Browne  still  maintained  his 
separatist  principles.  He  therefore  may  soon  have  found  his 
way  to  this  ancient  and  historic  city.  It  is  quite  possible  too 
that  from  the  remnant  of  the  company  in  Norwich  he  first 
gained  access  to  Cartwright's  letter  to  Harrison  after  it  had 
been  circulating  in  other  men's  hands  for  five  or  six  weeks. 
From  here,  too,  he  could  have  found  the  easiest  approach  to  the 
sea-coast,  in  case  he  made  a  second  journey  "beyonde  sea"\ 

1  That  Browne  may  have  made  a  second  voyage  "beyonde  sea"  is 
suggested  by  the  words,  "For  before  my  first  voiag  beyond  sea,  &  sence 


Robert  Browne  and  his  Congregation      113 

This  seems  to  me  now  to  be  a  more  natural  theory  than  that 
expressed  five  years  ago  in  "  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne  ", 
suggesting  that  he  passed  through  London.  The  manuscript 
written  in  answer  to  Cart^vright  could  easily  have  been  sent  to 
friends  in  London  either  by  Browne  himself  or  by  members  of 
the  congregation  in  Norwich.  However  this  may  be,  there  is 
excellent  proof,  as  is  well  known,  that  the  Brownist  congrega- 
tion in  Norwich  had  a  continuous  existence  from  1582  until 
1603,  and  probably  later. 

We  may  now  return  to  a  consideration  of  Browne's  answer 
to  Thomas  Cartwright's  letter  to  Harrison.  In  this  Browne 
shows  himself  once  more  to  have  been  fired  with  zeal  for 
defending  the  cause  which  he  had  launched.  He  set  laboriously 
to  work,  neatly  and  finely  penning  the  folio  sheets  on  which  he 
wrote,  until  he  had  covered  forty  pages.  To  be  sure,  it  seems 
that  his  views  had  grown  a  little  less  rigid,  but  still  he  defends 
the  way  of  separation  against  "  the  ordinarie  abused  assemblies 
of  false  professors  ",  but  denies  that  "  we  geue  all  the  English 

my  last  retourne  ",  which  occur  in  "  A  New  Years  Guift  ",  p.  27,  of  the 
Memorial  Hall  edition  published  at  London  in  1904;  and  our  information 
concerning  its  date  is  drawn  from  the  fact  that  Browne,  in  stating  to 
Stephen  Bredwell  his  reservations  relating  to  his  subscription  of  Oct.  7, 
1585,  says,  that  his  first  child  "was  baptized  in  England  he  being  beyonde 
sea"  (See  my  "True  Story",  1906,  p.  39).  Mr  Cater  ("Robert  Browne's 
Ancestors  and  Descendants  "  in  the  "  Transactions  "  of  the  Congregational 
Historical  Society  for  Sept.,  1905,  p.  155)  assigns  Feb.  8,  1584/5,  as 
the  date  of  the  baptism  of  Browne's  first  child,  Jone.  Granting  this  to  be 
correct,  and  knowing,  as  we  do,  that  Browne  was  in  Scotland  in  1583/4, 
we  must  draw  the  inference  that  Browne  had  left  England  and  probably 
the  British  Isles  for  a  second  time  before  Feb.  8,  1584/5.  That  Browne 
had  returned  to  England  with  his  wife  in  the  autumn  of  1584,  and  thence 
set  out  on  his  second  voyage,  I  infer  from  the  probability  that  his  wife 
was  with  him  in  Scotland  in  1583/4,  and  that  she  had  her  second  child, 
Anthony,  baptized  at  Stamford  on  May  10,  1585.  He  would  hardly  have 
allowed  his  wife  to  journey  home  alone  from  Scotland  at  that  dangerous 
period  of  history.  The  truth  of  this  theory  of  a  second  voyage  depends 
very  much  on  the  correctness  of  the  investigations  of  the  Rev.  F.  Ives 
Cater.  Should  he  have  been  mistaken  as  to  the  baptismal  records  of 
Browne's  children,  this  theory  might  have  to  be  abandoned.  On  the  point 
of  Browne's  second  voyage  the  reader  should  also  consult  Dr  Powicke's 
"Robert  Browne"  [1910],  pp.  39-40, 

B.  8 


114  Early  English  Dissenters 

assemblies,  the  black  stone  of  condemnation  ".  The  separation 
which  Browne  now  advocated  may,  therefore,  perhaps  be  termed 
conditional  separation  such  as  he  might  relinquish  under  changed 
conditions.  The  manuscript  which  he  wrote  is  still  preserved 
as  it  was  apparently  found  at  the  press  where  this  last  of 
Browne's  works  published  in  his  lifetime  was  printed.  Save 
for  some  fading  of  the  ink,  it  is  in  an  almost  perfect  state  of 
preservation,  and  still  bears  the  marks  probably  made  by  the 
printer  to  indicate  the  ends  of  the  various  pages  of  the  work  as 
published.  The  manuscript  is  in  Lambeth  Palace  Library^ 
where  it  was  practically  lost  on  account  of  its  not  being  entered 
in  the  index  to  the  catalogue  of  manuscripts.  It  was  first 
brought  to  the  attention  of  students  four  years  ago'^,  and  is 
entitled  "  An  answere  to  M''  Cartwrights  Letter,  for  loyninge  | 
with  the  English  Churches".  This  work  is  particularly  in- 
teresting to  one  who  wishes  to  study  the  evolution  of  Browne's 
views,  for  therein  he  opposes  certain  of  Cartwright's  opinions* 
which  later  in  his  "  Retractation  "  he  adopted  as  his  own.  This 
answer  with  Cartwright's  letter  was  apparently  published  with- 
out Browne's  knowledge  at  London  some  time  before  May  16, 
1585  under  the  title,  "An  answere  to  Ma*|STER  CART- 
WRIGHT  HIS  I  LETTER  FOR  I07NING  \  with  the 
English  Churches  :. . ." 

On  October  7,  1585,  Browne  made  his  subscription  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  though  he  had  various  reserva- 
tions in  mind*  when  he  signed  this  document,  it  nevertheless 
appears  to  mark  a  turning  point  in  his  career,  as  is  evident 
from  subsequent  events. 

We  may  now  direct  our  attention  to  the  remnant  of  Browne's 
congregation  which  remained  at  Middelburg  under  Harrison's 
guidance.  When  Harrison  died,  or  when  the  congregation  at 
Middelburg  was  disbanded,  is  not  exactly  known.     Harrison 

1  Press-mark,  MS.  113  (12). 

2  In  the  author's  "  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne  ". 

3  Cited  in  "  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Brovrae  ",  pp.  34-5. 

*  But  Browne  can  hardly  have  dared  to  mention  any  reservations  to 
Archbishop  Whitgift,  contrary  to  the  suggestion  in  "  The  True  Story  ", 
p.  58,  note. 


Robert  Brotrme  and  his  Congregation      115 

certainly  died  before  1 589  ^  and  from  the  fact  that  he  published 
no  books  after  1583,  we  may  infer  that  he  probably  did  not 
live  more  than  a  year  or  two  after  the  time  of  Browne's  departure 
for  Scotland.  Indeed,  Harrison's  illness  or  death  may  account 
for  Bro\NTie's  answering  Cartwright's  letter  to  Harrison  in  1584 
or  1585.  George  Johnson-  mentions  the  "  pride  of  Mr  Brovvnes 
wife /and  the  other  weomen  in  the  banished  English  Church  at 
Middelburgh  "  as  being  "  a  great  cause  of  disagreement  betweene 
Mr  Harison  and  Mr  Brown  ",  and  asks  "  whether  it  was  not  the 
cause  of  Mr  Harrisons  death  by  inward  griefe/who  knoweth  ?" 
"  Yea  some  have  so  judged/and  spoken  ",  he  adds.  Henry  Ains- 
worth  in  his  "  Covnterpoyson ",  1608,  says^ :  "  Mr  Harrison 
returned  not  vnto  your  church  of  England ;  but  died  at  Middle- 
burgh  in  this  faith  [of  separation]  that  we  professe".  The  account 
of  Harrison  in  the  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  which 
appears  to  be  inaccurate  concerning  one  or  two  points,  suggests 
that  he  died  about  1585,  a  very  good  conjecture. 

In  1603  nothing  seems  to  have  remained  of  Browne's  con- 
gregation at  Middelburg.  Says  George  Johnson ^  "  remember 
what  is  become  of  Brown  and  his  company,  who  excommuni- 
cated them  that  rebuked  pride  among  them /and  Mr  Browns 
abusing  his  learning  to  dawb  vp  the  same :  not  a  man  of  them 
remaineth  faithfull :  hath  not  the  Lord  swept  them  away,  as 
a  man  svveepeth  away  dung,  till  all  be  gone  ?..." 


We  now  have  before  us  an  outline  of  the  history  of  the  first 
Congregational  church  at  Norwich  and  Middelburg.  Very 
little  is  known  about  most  of  the  English  Nonconformist  and 
separatist  congregations  which  preceded  it.  Of  these,  we  are 
best  informed  concerning  the  congregation  of  the  Marian  exiles 

*  This  is  clearly  indicated  in  the  "  Epistle  Dedicatorie"  of  S.  B.[redwell]'s 
"THE  RASING...",  1588,  p.  xii. 

2  In  "A  discourse  of  some  troubles/...  ",  1603,  p.  7. 
J  Mr  Arber  ("Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  London,  1897,  p.  137) 
claims  that   "  This   is  quite  a  new   fact "   concerning  Harrison.     This 
passage,  however,  is  quoted  by  Hanbury  in  his  "  Historical  Memorials 
Vol.  I.,  p.  172. 

*  In  "  A  Discourse  ",  p.  20. 

8—2 


116  Early  English  Dissenters 

at  Frankfort  on  the  Main.  No  account  of  the  activities  of  this 
church,  however,  was  published  before  1574,  so  that  Richard 
Fitz  and  his  predecessors  may  have  been  little  acquainted  with 
its  internal  affairs.  Browne,  on  the  other  hand,  must  have  been 
familiar  with  the  record  of  its  troubles,  and,  though  his  views 
on  church  polity  evidently  were  not  derived  from  that  narrative, 
the  very  completeness  of  the  organization  of  his  own  "companie" 
testifies  to  such  a  probability. 

Compared  with  Browne's  congregation  in  point  of  organiza- 
tion that  of  Richard  Fitz  was  probably  but  as  a  shadow,  and  in 
point  of  the  literary  activity  of  its  members  it  is  hardly  worth 
mentioning.  The  only  strong  resemblance  between  the  two 
churches  appears  to  lie  in  the  purpose  which  actuated  their 
organization.  They  were  both  composed  of  separatists,  but 
certainly  Fitz's  congregation,  as  has  already  been  seen,  was  not 
regularly  constituted  as  a  Congregational  church  of  the  present- 
day  type.  Browne's  church,  on  the  other  hand,  stands  out  in  a 
class  by  itself.  Browne  at  this  early  stage  of  his  career  may 
certainly  be  called  a  pioneer  of  modern  Congregationalism, 
though  a  long  period  of  evolution  intervenes  between  him  and 
the  Congregationalists  and  Independents  of  to-day. 

Browne,  too,  although  he  was  considered  unimportant  in  his 
own  time,  deserves  a  place  among  the  literary  men  and  religious 
leaders  of  his  day,  beside  Richard  Hooker,  Walter  Travers,  and 
Thomas  Cartwright.  Church  historians  and  other  writers  in 
the  past  have  found  Browne  a  puzzle  and  have  had  little  faith 
in  his  sincerity.  The  Congregationalists  even  have  said  some 
hard  things  concerning  him  and  have  sometimes  appeared 
ashamed  to  admit  that  he  was  in  any  way  related  to  them.  To 
counteract  such  feeling  Dr  Dexter  invented  the  ingenious 
theory  that  Browne  became  insane  in  later  life, — a  theory  the 
falsity  of  which,  it  is  hoped,  has  already  been  made  sufficiently 
manifest.  Dr  Leonard  Bacon,  it  has  been  said,  never  could 
understand  why  the  Congregationalists  should  claim  Browne  as 
their  earliest  pioneer.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  connection  is 
rather  indirect,  but  of  course  history  cannot  be  altered  merely 
to  accord  with  one's  preferences.  And  after  all  there  is  no 
need  to  be  ashamed  of  Browne,  for  as  a  young  man  he  was  one 


Robert  Broimie  and  his  Congregati(yn      111 

of  the  keenest  religious  thinkers  of  his  time.  He  undoubtedly 
was  somewhat  rash  and  impulsive  in  his  earlier  years,  and  he 
was  a  bold,  fearless  preacher,  but  he  urged  his  congregation  to 
more  moderation  in  times  of  danger,  and  he  was  willing  to  suffer 
many  imprisonments  for  his  beliefs.  He  had  also  an  honest, 
earnest  spirit.  The  troubles  of  the  period  in  which  he  lived 
were  a  heavy  burden  to  his  peace  of  mind,  and  he  tried  his 
utmost  to  do  what  he  believed  would  help  his  country.  Best 
of  all,  Browne  learned  from  experience  and  gained  wisdom  with 
age,  as  who  will  not  admit  who  observes  the  kindly  spirit  that 
characterizes  his  "  Retractation  "  and  "  A  New  Years  Guift "  ? 
No  wonder  Bred  well  in  1588  could  not  understand  him,  for 
already  the  old  Browne  had  vanished,  and  the  new  Browne  was 
worthy  of  a  larger  place  than  either  his  contemporaries,  or  his 
successors  were,  or  thus  far  have  been,  willing  to  give  him. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  RISE  OF  THE  BARROWISTS 

Between  the  years  1586  and  1592  Nonconformist  ideas 
became  still  more  prevalent  in  and  about  London.  Here,  soon 
after  his  acceptance  of  the  Head  Mastership  of  St  Olave's 
Grammar  School,  Robert  Browne  began  to  sow  the  seeds  of 
Puritan  discontent.  Stephen  Bredwell  has  recorded  that 
Browne  sometimes  attended  meetings  in  private  houses  and  on 
one  occasion  at  least  preached  before  such  an  assembly,  but  it 
is  improbable  that  he  organized  any  congregation  about  London, 
though  he  is  said  to  have  preached  to  "  certaine  people  "  "  in  a 
Gravel-pit  neare  Islington"'^,  and  though  his  opinions  certainly 

1  Ephraim  Pagitt's  "  Heresiography ",  fourth  edition,  London,  1647, 
p.  55.  Very  likely  the  "people"  to  whom  reference  is  here  made  were 
the  Barrowists,  who  probably  began  to  hold  their  meetings  in  London  late 
in  the  summer  or  early  in  the  autumn  of  1587.  The  ground  on  which 
Browne  justified  his  private  preaching  is  doubtless  to  be  seen  in  "A  New 
Years  Quift",  written  on  Dec.  31,  1588.  By  this  time  Browne's  views  had 
become  much  clarified,  and  after  formal  separation  he  had  found  his  way 
back  into  the  State  Church.  For  the  Hierarchy  of  Archbishops  and 
Bishops  he  had  little  or  no  more  reverence  than  before,  but  his  opinion 
of  the  importance  of  the  civil  magistrate  had  been  much  expanded  and 
was  much  more  clearly  defined,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  following  citations 
from  the  Memorial  Hall  edition  of  "A  New  Years  Guift",  London,  1904, 
pp.  30-32  :— 

"  If  then  it  be  demaunded  who  shal  call  k  consecrat  Ministers, 
excommunicat,  depose  &  put  downe  false  teachers  &  bad  fellowes,  & 
iudg  in  a  number  of  ecclesiastical  causes,  let  the  word  of  God  answere, 
which  appointeth  the  cheifest  &  most  difficult  matters  to  be  iudged  by 
them  of  cheifest  authoritie  &  guifts.  &  other  matters  of  inferior  gouernours 
Exod.  18.  22.  1  Cor.  6.  5.  Rom/.  12.  3.  If  it  be  asked  who  be  of  cheifest 
guifts  or  ought  to  haue  cheifest  authoritie,  I  answere  that  the  ciuil 
Magistrates  haue  their  right  in  al  causes  to  iudge  &  sett  order,  &  it  is 
intollerable  prsesumption  for  particular  persons  to  skan  of  euerie  Magia- 


The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists  119 

appear  to  have  encouraged  those  who  came  in  contact  with  him 
to  be  lax  conformists,  if  not  separatists.  In  fact,  for  some  time 
after  his  departure  from  London  Browne's  influence  seems  to 
have  been  felt.  We  find,  for  instance,  that  Christopher  Diggins 
of  St  Olave's  parish,  Southwark,  where  Browne  lived  for  a 
time,  deposed  on  April  3,  1593,  that  he  had  "not  come  nor 
repaired  to  any  parishe  Churche  to  heare  devyne  service  these 
two  yeres",  i.e.,  since  the  spring  of  1591,  and  George  Knifton, 
one  of  the  two  elders  in  Johnson's  congregation,  also  in  1593, 
directly  ascribes  to  Browne  the  beginning  of  his  Nonconformity, 

trats  guifts  or  authoritie  or  to  denie  them  the  power  of  iudging  ecclesiastical 
causes..." 

"  If  againe  it  be  saied,  that  while  men  might  take  &  refuse  their  ministers 
as  they  list,  all  factions  &  heresies  might  grow  / 1  answere  that  the  ciuil 
Magistral  must  restraine  that  licentiousnes.  But  the  way  to  restraine  it 
is  praescribed  of  God  /.  First  that  a  number  of  vnlawful  ministers  being 
now  descried  &  made  manifest  to  the  world,  that  the  Magistrats  if  they  can 
not  remoue  them,  do  yet  quietly  suffer  the  people  to  fall  away  from  them, 
which  if  they  do  not  suffer,  there  will  be  in  tyme,  ten  fould  more  factions 
&  diuisions  then  otherwise  there  should  be,..." 

"  Thirdly  that  for  auoiding  heresies  &  strange  opininions  [«ic],  none  be 
admitted  or  suffered  to  refuse  or  withdrawe  them  selues  which  hould  not 
the  doctrine  of  christianitie  after  some  exacter  forme  of  catechisme,  &  be 
also  able  to  geiue  a  good  reason  of  their  religion  &  profession  in  all  such 
matters  /.  And  that  therefore  if  they  haue  conference,  readings  or  exposi- 
tions, in  priuate  houses,  the  officers  appointed  for  that  purpose  do  serch 
&  trie  their  opinions  &  doctrine  &  see  their  orders  /  &  if  nothing  be  errone- 
ously &  disorderedhe  attempted,  that  they  be  suffered,  yea  though  some 
smaller  fault  or  error  be  committed  or  escaped,  yet  if  a  greater  fault 
happen,  that  they  be  punishable  accordingely. 

"  Lastly,  that  none  be  suffered  to  haue  their  voice  or  right  in  chosing 
church  offices  &  officers  but  onely  such  as  are  tried  to  be  sufficiently 
grounded  &  tried  &  to  be  able  to  geiue  a  reason  of  their  faieth  &  religion  / 
And  that  the  ciuil  Magistrats  may  if  they  will,  be  both  present  &  directers 
of  the  choise,  yet  permitting  anie  man  to  make  iust  exceptions  against 
them  which  are  to  be  chosen[.]  Further  that  they  which  are  to  ordeine, 
consecrate  or  pronounce  them  authorised,  do  it  not  in  their  owne  name, 
but  by  voice  &  testimonie  of  the  most  of  those  wyser  sort,  whose  consent 
&  voices  for  the  most  part  he  hath  gathered  &  doth  shew.  Also  it  skilleth 
not  who  do  pronounc[e]  &  consecrate  them  whether  Bishop  or  other,  so 
that  it  be  according  to  the  forme  aboue  mencioned  &  the  partie  be  a  wise 
&  good  man/,..." 


120  Early  English  Dissenters 

Browne,  however,  it  will  be  noticed  did  not  commend  separation 
to  him : — 

[Knifton]  saythe  he  hath  had  conference  with  M''  Browne  whoe 
perswaded  him  not  to  recive  the  Communyon  and  synce  hath  had 
conference  with  Barrowe  with  Greenewood  and  with  Penry  and  was 
made  Elder  about  half  a  yere  since  [in  September,  1592]  and  that 
he  misliketh  Cartwrights  plan  [?]  of  Church  goverment^ 

John  Dayrell  in  "  A  TREATISE  OF  |  THE  CHVRCH.  j 
WRITTEN  AGAINST  |  them  of  the  Separation,  commonly  | 
called  Brownists.  I . . . ",  London,  1617,  says, — "your  seperation 
[probably  referring  especially  to  Francis  Johnson's  congregation] 
is  as  auncient  as  Browne,  who  first  caused,  or  at  least  greatly 
furthered  that  seperation  and  schisme  from  our  Church :  where 
vpon  you  are  called  Brownists"^. 

In  view  of  the  work  already  done  by  Dr  Dexter,  Dr  Powicke, 
and  others,  it  is  hardly  necessary  here  to  dwell  upon  the  lives 
and  activities  of  the  Barrowist  leaders.  What  now  appears  to 
need  more  attention  is  the  story  of  the  rise  of  the  first  Barrowist 
congregation.  The  principal  original  sources  for  the  informa- 
tion needed  are  to  be  found  in  the  various  Barrowist  depositions 
contained  in  the  hitherto  too  little  used  Harleian  MSS.  6848 
and  6849^  in  the  British  Museum. 

1  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  76  verso.  2  p,  isj, 

3  Mr  Arber  in  prefacing  his  account  of  the  history  of  Francis  Johnson's 
congregation  ("Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  London,  1897,  p.  105)  says  : — 

"Harleian  MS.  7042  consists  of  the  Baker  Transcripts  from  the 
Manuscripts  (now  lost)  of  the  Lord  Keeper  of  the  Great  Seal,  Sir  John 
Puckering  ;  who  died  on  30th  April  1596." 

Fortunately  for  the  historian  this  statement  is  not  accurate.  The  MSS. 
of  Sir  John  Puckering  which  Thomas  Baker  transcribed  certainly  are  not 
lost,  but  form  parts  of  Harleian  MSS.  6848  and  6849,  and  though  too 
little  used  by  Dr  Dexter,  are  mentioned  by  him  again  and  again.  Why  he 
persisted  in  using  the  transcripts  so  frequently,  when  the  originals  or  early 
copies  of  them  were  at  hand,  is  a  mystery.  Mr  Arber  must  have  been  led 
into  making  his  erroneous  statement  by  too  closely  following  Dr  Dexter. 
In  the  account  here  given  of  the  early  Barrowists  the  Baker  transcripts 
are  not  used,  and  reliance  is  placed  entirely  on  the  Puckering  MSS. 

Dr  Powicke  has  called  my  attention  to  the  fact  that  Mr  Arber  in  "An 
Introductory  Sketch  to  the  Martin  Marprelate  Controversy,  1588-1590", 


The  Rise  of  the  Barroivtsts  121 

From  similar  statements  at  the  begimiing*  and  at  the  close - 
of  a  document  contained  in  one  of  these  manuscripts  bearing 
the  title,  "The  Manner  of  thassemblie  of  the  secret  Con- 
venticklers ",  etc.,  and  also  marked,  "  Certen  wicked  sectes  & 
oipinions.  marche  1588  &  89  No.  3i.  Eliz.",  it  is  evident  that 
a  congregation  of  secret  conventiclers  had  been  meeting  in 
London  for  a  year  and  a  half  before  that  date.  This  informa- 
tion corresponds  well  with  the  report  of  an  examination'  of 
twenty-one  so-called  "Brownestes"  held  on  Oct.  8,  1587,  in  the 
palace  of  the  Bishop  of  London.  They  had  been  taken  the 
same  day  "  at  privat  conventicles  "  in  Henry  Martin's  house  in 
St  Andrew's  in  the  Wardrobe,  and  inasmuch  as  it  was  so  diffi- 
cult to  hold  private  meetings  in  those  days  without  detection,  it 
is  probable  that  the  congregation  had  not  held  many  meetings 
before  that  time.  The  conventiclers  taken  were  [Nicholas] 
Crane  a  Puritan  minister  already  mentioned  in  connection  with 
the  Plumbers'  Hall  congregation,  Henry  Martin,  George  Smells, 
Edward  Boyce,  Anne  Jackson,  George  Collier,  Katherin  Owin 
[Onyon],  Roberte  Lacy,  Thomas  Freeman,  Edithe  Burry 
[Burroughe],  Mr  [John]  Grenewood  preacher,  Margaret  May- 
nerd,  "Alice  Roe  widow  ",  Agnes  Wyman,  Roberte  Griffith,  John 
Chaundler,  Edmond  Thompson,  Henry  Thompson,  Roberte  Red- 
borne  and  Thomas  Russell  servants  of  Mr  Boyce,  and  Peter  Allen 
servant  of  Mr  Allen,  a  Salter.  The  list  ends  with  the  words 
"  vacat  Clement  Gamble  servante  to  Anne  lackson",  and  all  the 
words  of  this  entry  but  "vacat"  and  "servante"  have  been  crossed 
out.  There  is  also  no  number  before  Gamble's  name,  though 
all  the  other  names  mentioned  are  numbered,  so  that  he  may 
not  have  been  considered  a  regular  member  of  the  company. 

The  meeting  of  this  congregation  may  have  resulted  in 
part  from  the  Puritan  activities  of  Nicholas  Crane'*,  who  had 
always  been  a  difficult  person  for  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 

1880,  not  only  uses  the  Puckering  manuscripts  in  Harl.  MSS.  6848  and 
6849,  but,  strange  to  say,  seems  to  know  that  they  are  the  Puckering 
manuscripts !     See  what  Mr  Arber  says  on  pp.  35-40,  88-93,  etc. 

1  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  83  recto.  2  jn^^^  foi.  84  recto. 

3  S.  P.  Dom.,  Eliz.,  Vol.  cciv.  (10)  in  the  Public  Record  Office. 

*  A  writing  of  Nicholas  Crane's  against  subscription  is  given  in 
"A  parte  of  a  register ".     See  "  The  Table "  of  Contents,  p.  iii. 


122  tJarly  English  Dissenters 

authorities  to  deal  with.  To  Crane's  assistance,  we  may  suppose, 
came  John  Greenwood,  who,  according  to  the  manuscript  list  of 
prisoners  of  Oct.  8,  1587,  was  a  "  preacher  depriued  of  his 
benefice  in  norfolke  about  2  yeres  past  [i.e.,  about  October, 
1585],  takin  at  the  said  privat  conventicles  in  martins  howse." 
Greenwood  quickly  became  the  leader  of  the  company,  while 
Crane,  who  may  never  have  become  a  true  separatist  and  was 
well  advanced  in  years,  seems  to  have  retired  into  the  back- 
ground. It  may  have  been  the  influence  of  Henry  Barrowe 
that  induced  the  little  company  more  and  more  to  become  full 
separatists. 

Hitherto,  Greenwood  has  generally  been  said  to  have  been 
arrested  in  the  autumn  of  1586,  but  we  can  now  safely  assign  his 
imprisonment  to  October  8  of  the  following  year.  As  leader  of 
the  congregation  he  was  committed  to  the  Clink,  while  George 
Collier  and  Margaret  Maynerd  were  removed  to  Bridewell.  As 
far  as  this  list  is  concerned,  it  might  appear  that  the  rest  were 
set  free,  but  from  a  subsequent  statement,  still  extant  in  manu- 
script, prepared  about  May,  1589\  it  becomes  evident  that 
Henry  Tomson ;  Edward  Boyce,  or  Boyes ;  John  Chaundler ; 
George  Smells,  or  Smalls;  Edithe  Burry,  Barrowe,  or  Burroughe; 
Alice  Roe,  or  Roo ;  Nicholas  Crane;  and  probably  Roberte  Griffin 
or  Griffith,  were  also  detained  at  that  time,  or  if  they  were  then 
set  free,  were  subsequently  retaken.  Clement  Gambell,  or 
Gamble,  "servante  to  Anne  lackson",  for  some  reason,  appears 
to  have  been  at  liberty,  or  missing,  at  the  time  of  the  examina- 
tion of  the  rest  of  the  congregation  in  the  Bishop's  palace. 
Perhaps  he  had  escaped.  If,  as  has  been  suggested.  Gamble 
was  not  regarded  as  a  whole-hearted  Brownist,  it  should  be 
said  that  he  certainly  seems  to  have  attended  the  church 
meetings  regularly  for  a  year  and  a  half  after  this  examination, 
and  was  apparently  retaken  in  March,  1588/9,  when  he  gave 
evidence  concerning  the  activities  of  the  congregation  and 
probably  was  at  once  given  his  freedom. 

Of  the  persons  examined  (Nicholas)  Crane,  the  Puritan 
preacher,  is  here  described  as  having  been  "  a  student  in  Lawe 
in  the  inner  Chauncery",  and  as  having  been  made  a  minister 

1  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  20  verso  and  21  recto,  in  the  British  Museum. 


The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists  123 

"  by  23  Grindall  when  he  was  Bushop  of  London".  Crane  does 
not  yet  seem  to  have  become  a  real  separatist,  for  evidently  the 
most  striking  statement  made  by  him  was  "  that  all  the  booke 
(meaninge  the  comon  booke,  is  not  gospell)",  which  is  certainly 
a  very  mild  statement.  Indeed,  I  doubt  if  he  ever  advanced 
beyond  the  Puritan  position.  Margaret  Maynerd,  however,  was 
of  a  different  and  bolder  type.  When  examined  she  spoke 
without  reserve,  saying  that  "  ther  is  no  church  in  England", 
and  that  "she  hath  not  bin  at  church  theis  x.  yeres".  The  rest 
of  the  company  appear  to  have  said  nothing  especially  offensive. 
The  full  text  of  the  examination  of  these  conventiclers  is  given 
in  the  volume  of  documents. 

After  the  imprisonment  of  Greenwood  the  nine  members 
who  were  set  free  were  apparently  left  to  shift  for  themselves, 
but  three  of  them  certainly  retained  their  interest  in  the  con- 
gi-egation.  Other  prisoners  were  taken  from  time  to  time  as 
Henry  Barrowe;  Jerome  Studley;  Christopher  Raper,  or 
Roper;  Roger  Jackson;  George  Bryghte;  Thomas  Legate^, 
(William-)  Gierke,  or  Clarke;  Alyce  Chaundler;  John  Fraunces; 
Robart  Badkinge ;  Wylliam  Denford ;  Quyntin  Smythe ;  John 
Purdye ;  and  William  Bromelll  Of  the  prisoners  taken  before 
May,  1589,  John  Chaundler,  George  Bryghte,  Margaret  Maynerd, 
Alice  Roe,  Roger  Jackson,  and  Nicholas  Crane,  had  died  before 
that  date,  while  Roberto  Griffin,  or  Griffith,  had  been  bailed, 
"  being  very  sicke  "  *. 

It  is  possible  that  at  first  the  congregation  was  not  entirely 
composed  of  separatists,  for  William  Gierke  in  his  examina- 
tion on  April  2,  1593,  says  "  he  hath  refrained  to  come  to 
churche  but  halfe  a  yere,  but  hath  held  his  opinions  these  fyve 
yeres",  i.e.,  since  the  spring  of  1588.  The  church  covenant  of 
this  congregation  seems  to  have  been  very  simple.  Gierke  says 
that  on  his  becoming  a  member  he  merely  "  made  promise  to 

^  This  Thomas  Legate  I  take  to  have  been  one  of  the  three  brothers 
Legate  (the  earliest  English  Seekers),  who  died  in  Newgate  about  1607,  as 
will  be  seen  in  Chapter  viii. 

2  Soe  the  deposition  of  William  Gierke  on  Mar.  8,  1592/3  in  the  volume 
of  documents. 

3  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  20  verso  and  21  recto.  *  Ibid. 


124  Early  English  Dissenters 

stand  with  the  said  Congregation  soe  longe  as  they  did  stand  for 
the  truthe  and  glory  of  god".  In  this  statement  any  engage- 
ment of  separation  from  the  Church  of  England  is  rather 
implied  than  expressed,  and  yet  it  will  be  noticed  later  in  this 
chapter,  that  the  general  policy  of  the  congregation  was  cer- 
tainly separatist  before  March,  1588/9,  and  probably  in  the 
main  from  the  beginning  of  its  history. 

Several  versions  of  the  early  covenant  of  this  congregation 
are  given  in  different  depositions,  and  hence  it  probably  had  as 
yet  no  stereotyped  form.  It  may  be  of  interest  to  insert  the 
various  texts : — 

1.  As  given  by  William  Gierke  (previously  cited). 

2.  As  given  by  "  lohn  Barnes  tayler",  who  evidently  had 
been  a  member  since  the  spring  of  1588/9 : — 

"  Item  he  saith  that  at  his  first  entringe  into  that  societie 
he  made  noe  other  vowe,  but  that  he  wold  followe  them  soe  farr 
forth  as  the  word  of  god  did  warraunt  him". 

3.  As  given  by  Quintin  Smyth  of  Southwark,  feltmaker, 
who  apparently  had  been  a  member  of  the  congregation  since 
the  spring  of  1590/1  :— 

"  Item,  he  sayeth  he  did  covenaunt  with  the  Congregacion 
to  walk  with  them  in  the  lawes  of  god,  soe  longe  as  ther  doinges 
should  be  approved  by  the  word  of  god,  and  soe  longe  would 
forsake  all  other  assemblies". 

4.  As  given  on  April  6,  1593,  by  William  Weaver  "of 
Grayes  Line  lane  Shomaker",  who  had  then  been  a  member  of 
the  congregation  for  over  a  year  and  a  half,  that  is,  since  about 
October,  1591  :— 

"  Item,  he  saieth  that  when  he  was  ioyned  to  their  congre- 
gacion, they  caused  him  to  vse  words  to  this  effect,  that  he 
should  promise  to  walke  with  them,  soe  longe  as  the[y]  followed 
the  ordinance  of  Ghrist".  In  another  deposition  he  says  he 
"  made  a  Gouenaunte  to  the  Gongregation  to  bee  of  their 
Societie  &  refuseth  to  goe  to  the  churche". 

5.  As  given  by  Daniel  Bucke  probably  in  the  spring  of 
1591/2  :— 

"  Beinge    asked    what    vowe    or    promise    he    had    made 


The  Rise  of  the  Barroivists  125 

when  he  came  first  to  their  socyetye  he  aunswhereth  and  saith 
that  he  made  this  protestation,  That  he  wold  walke  in  the  waye 
of  the  lord  and  as  Fan*  as  might  be  warraunted  by  the  word 
of  god  ". 

6.  As  given  by  Abraham  Pulbery,  who  evidently  became  a 
member  not  earlier  than  March,  1591/2  : — 

"  Item  hee  saieth  that  hee  hath  made  a  promise  to  the 
Lord  in  the  presence  of  his  Congregacion  when  hee  entred 
therevnto  that  hee  would  walke  with  them  as  they  would  walke 
with  the  Lorde". 

Robert  Abume,  or  Abraham,  who  does  not  appear  to  have 
become  a  member  of  the  congregation  before  September,  1592, 
evidently  was  not  required  to  enter  into  covenant  at  all,  for  he 
says : — 

"he  this  examinant,  beynge  amongest  them  [at  Bridewell 
prison],  was  receaved  and  admytted  into  ther  societie  and 
congregacion,  without  eyther  examinacion,  or  further  enquirie 
of  his  conversation". 

Fortunately  the  customs  and  views  of  this  church  are  well 
known.  The  paper  containing  this  information  has  been  largely 
given  in  the  volume  of  documents,  and  brief  reference  has 
already  been  made  to  it  as  bearing  the  title,  "  The  Manner  of 
thassemblie  of  the  secret  Conventicklers",  etc.  The  material 
contained  in  this  document  is  drawn  chiefly  from  the  confessions 
made  in  March,  1588/9,  by  Clement  Gamble  and  one  John 
Dove,  M.A.,  the  latter  of  whom  appears  to  have  gained  entrance 
to  some  of  the  meetings  of  the  congregation  in  order  to  see 
what  their  opinions  were. 

The  principal  points  mentioned  may  be  summarized  and 
arranged  as  follows  : — 

I.    As  TO  THEIR  Meetings. 

In  the  summer  the  congregation  met  in  the  fields  a  mile  or 
more  outside  London,  where  most  of  the  members  would  sit 
down  on  a  bank  while  several  expounded  the  Bible  to  them. 
They  would  arrange  in  advance  where  to  hold  their  meeting  on 
the  following  Sunday,  as  for  instance  in  some  particular  house, 


126  Early  English  Dissenters 

where  they  would  assemble  as  early  as  five  o'clock  in  the 
morning.  Here  they  would  remain  all  day  (probably  for  fear  of 
detection),  engaging  in  prayer  and  exposition  of  the  Scriptures. 
They  would  dine  together,  and  afterward  take  a  collection  to 
pay  for  their  meal.  If  the  amount  collected  exceeded  the  sum 
required,  some  member  would  carry  the  remainder  to  those  of 
the  congregation  who  were  confined  in  the  prisons. 

II.    As  TO  THEIR  Views. 

1.  Of  Prayer. 
They  believed  in  the  use  of  extemporary,  but  not  of  any 
form  of  read,  or  "stynted",  prayer.  They  never  used  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  but  evidently  considered  it  only  "  A  Patterne  of  Trve 
Prayer".  As  to  their  manner  of  praying  John  Dove  quaintly 
says,  "  one  speketh  and  the  rest  doe  grone,  or  sob.  or  sigh,  as  if 
they  wold  wringe  out  teares". 

2.  Of  Church  Government. 
"  In  all  there  metinges  they  teach  that  there  is  noe  heade 
or  supreme  gove[m]ment  of  the  Church  of  god,  but  Christe, 
That  the  Queen  hath  no  aucthoritie  to  appoyn[t]  mynisters  in 
the  Church  nor  to  set  downe  any  govermente  for  the  Church 
which  is  not  directlie  commanded  in  godes  worde". 

3.     Of  the  Ministry. 
Public   ministers   are   not   needed  now  that  the  office  of 
apostles   has   ceased.     Any   private   man   (layman)  who   is   a 
Brother  (churchmember),  whatever  his  calling,  may  preach. 

4.  Of  the  Church  of  England. 
They  condemn  all  attendance  at  any  of  the  services  of  the 
Church  of  England  including  even  public  prayer  and  preaching, 
and  they  call  its  preachers  "  fals  teachers  &  falce  prophettes  " 
"sent  in  the  lordes  anger  to  deceyve  his  people  with  lyes", 
"and  all  that  come  to  our  Churches  to  publicque  praier  or 
sermons  they  accompt  damnable  soules". 

5.     Of  Baptism. 
They    hold    it   "vnlawfull    to    baptise    Children   [infants] 
emongest  vs  [i.e.,  in  the  Church  of  England]  but  rather  Chewse 


The  Rise  of  the  Barroioists  127 

to  let  them  goe  vnbaptized  "  until  a  satisfactory  baptism  (by  a 
true  preacher  of  the  Gospel)  can  be  secured,  even  though  it 
come  later  in  life.  (They  were  in  a  sense  therefore  Cata- 
baptists,  but  not  Anabaptists.  The  Barrowists  evidently  did 
not  attempt  "a  baptizing  againe"  as  claimed  by  R.  Alison S  but 
were  only  opposed  to  infant  baptism  when  it  was  in  their 
opinion  improperly  administered.) 

6.  Of  the  Administration  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Clement  Gamble  confessed  that  although  he  had  attended 
all  their  regular  meetings  for  a  year  and  a  half  he  never  saw 
the  Lord's  Supper  administered,  and  did  not  know  where  the 
ceremony  took  placed  It  is  possible,  of  course,  that  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Communion  only  commenced  after  the  arrival  of 
Francis  Johnson. 

7.  Of  Marriage. 

"  for  marradges  if  any  of  there  Chirch  Marry  together  some 
of  there  owne  Brotherhood  must  marry  them  as  of  late  A  Cople 
were  married  in  the  fleet". 

8.  Of  Apostates. 

Any  one  of  their  secret  Brotherhood  who  deserts  them  and 
returns  to  the  services  of  the  Church  of  England,  even  to 
public  prayer  and  preaching,  is  condemned  as  an  apostate. 

9.  Of  Delivering  over  to  Satan. 
Such  an  apostate  who  continues,  or  is  disposed  to  continue, 
worshipping  in  the  Church  of  England,  they  summon  and  seek 
to  win  back  by  argument,  but  if  they  fail  by  this  means  they 
give  him  over  to  the  hands  of  Satan  (or  excommunicate  him), 
until  he  shall  submit,  and  while  the  congregation  is  kneeling, 
the  one  who  has  pronounced  the  sentence  of  excommunication 

»  "A  PLAINE  I  CONFVTATION  OF  |  A  TREATISE  OF 
BROWNISME",  London,  1590,  sig.  A3  verso,  where  he  says,  "(Whervpon 
though  the  renuer  of  this  schisme  [of  Donatists],  Browne  I  meane,  did  not 
in  plaine  wordes  require  a  baptising  againe,  yet  their  successors  [the  Bar- 
rowists] in  their  established  Church  attempted  it  [From  margin.  "  Some 
of  their  owne  companie  haue  confessed  it."].)..." 

2  This  statement  may  indicate  that  Gamble  was  not  regarded  as  a  real 
member  of  the  church. 


128  Early  English  Dissenters 

prays  God  to  ratify  that  censure.  It  would  appear  that  this 
was  the  first  modern  congregation  in  England  to  use  the  term 
"give  over  to  the  hands  of  Satan".  Already  before  March, 
1588/9,  one  Love  had  been  given  over  to  Satan,  because  he  had 
deserted  the  brotherhood. 

The  story  is  also  told  in  this  document  of  one  "Wydowe 
Vnyon  "  who  belonged  to  the  congregation,  and  had  a  twelve- 
year-old  child  which  was  unbaptized.  Evidently  the  child  had 
been  so  frightened  by  people  in  the  Church  of  England,  that  it 
had  come  to  believe  it  was  in  danger  of  eternal  damnation  if  it 
should  remain  unbaptized.  It  is  reported  often  to  have  besought 
its  mother  to  allow  it  to  be  baptized,  but  Widow  "  Vnyon  "  was 
firm  in  her  principles.  Hearing  of  the  case,  the  Chancellor  of 
London  is  said  to  have  caused  the  child  "to  be  publiquely 
Baptised,  at  a  sermon  made  for  that  purpose",  in  the  summer 
of  1588,  "and  the  mother  ranne  awaie  for  feare  of  punish- 
mente ".  This  widow  seems  to  have  been  Katherin  Onyon,  who 
in  a  deposition  of  1593  is  recorded  as  being  a  "  spinster  dwellinge 
at  Allgate",  and  whose  name  is  reported  by  mistake  in  the  list 
of  Oct.  8,  1587,  as  "  Katherin  Owin". 

On  Nov.  19,  1587,  Henry  Barrowe  visited  John  Greenwood 
in  the  Clink  prison.  This  date  stands  as  Nov.  19,  1586,  in  the 
first  examination  of  Barrowe  before  the  High  Commissioners  as 
published  by  him,  but  it  is  undoubtedly  incorrect  \  and  the 
mistake  is  probably  due  to  a  typographical  error,  though  we 
should  also  remember  that  he  wrote  this  account  in  prison  about 
1592,  and  only  "  as  neere  as  my  [his]  memorie  could  cary  ". 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  very  probable  that  Nov.  19, 1587,  and 
not  1586,  is  the  correct  date,  since  there  appears  to  be  no 
official  record  of  Greenwood's  being  taken  prisoner  before  Oct.  8, 
1587.  Furthermore,  it  is  six  weeks  to  a  day  from  Oct.  8,  1587, 
to  Nov.  19,  1587,  which  is  the  exact  length  of  time  mentioned 
by  the  captives*  as  having  elapsed  between  the  beginning  of 

*  See  "  The  Examinations  of  Henry  Barrowe  lohn  Grenewood  |  and 
lohn  Penrie / before  the  high  |  commissioners/...",  4°  [1593].  The  accept- 
ance of  this  view  will  require  the  alteration  of  some  of  the  dates  of 
Barrowe's  examinations  as  given  by  Dr  Powicke  in  his  "Henry  Barrow". 

2  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  20  verso,  where  it  is  stated  that  Greenwood  had 
been  imprisoned  in  the  Clink  thirty  weeks  and  Barrowe  twenty-four  weeks. 


The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists  129 

Greenwood's  imprisonment  and  that  of  Ban-owe,  while  it  is 
indirectly  specified  elsewhere  by  the  prisoners  in  manuscript 
that  they  were  imprisoned  in  the  autumn  of  1587  S  and  not  of 
1586.  BaiTowe  was  evidently  a  member  of  the  congregation 
as  early  as  Oct.  8,  1587,  and  probably  from  the  time  when 
the  private  meetings  began  to  be  held,  which  presumably 
was  not  much  earlier  than  that  date.  Certainly  he  knew  the 
"  brethren "  whom  he  saw  at  his  first  examination  before  the 
High  Commissioners,  wherein  it  was  also  said  that  the  capture 
of  his  person  had  long  been  desired ^  i.e.,  we  may  suppose,  for 
six  weeks  before  Nov.  19,  1587,  or  since  Oct.  8,  1587. 

Barrowe's  long  imprisonment  may  have  prevented  him  from 
ever  assuming  more  than  the  position  of  a  trusted  adviser  to 
the  congregation,  but  it  is  also  extremely  doubtful  whether  at 
this  early  period  even  under  the  most  favourable  circumstances 
he  would  as  a  layman  have  taken  the  ofiice  of  pastor  or  teacher 
among  the  conventiclers.  Besides,  it  is  knovm  that  Barrowe 
and  Greenwood  did  not  always  agree.  Barrowe,  however,  by 
writing  and  publishing  works  full  of  scathing  invective  against 
the  Church  of  England  and  its  ministry,  became  far  more  in- 
fluential than  any  minister  at  that  time  connected  with  the 
separatists,  and  in  this  way  made  himself  their  true  leader  and 
the  real  formulator  of  their  policy.  Indeed,  without  him  the 
congregation  might  have  made  little  progress.  With  his  aid  it 
became  widely  known. 

Barrowe  certainly  resembled  Robert  Browne  in  his  impetuous 
zeal  to  reform  the  Church  of  England,  but  neither  Barrowe  nor 
Greenwood  ever  admitted  that  they  had  taken  their  opinions 
from  Browne.  In  this,  I  think,  they  spoke  truly.  Browne  and 
Barrowe  never  could  agree,  and  we  now  know  that  there  were 
bitter  dissensions  between  them  which  were  carried  on  in 
writing  over  a  considerable  period  of  time.     That  there  had 

1  See  Strype's  "Annals",  ed.  1731,  p.  95.  This  Supplication  was 
evidently  written  early  in  January,  1592/3  ("Annals",  p.  96),  and  if 
Barrowe  and  Greenwood  had  then  been  imprisoned  for  five  years,  as  is 
stated,  they  were,  therefore,  taken  prisoners  in  1587. 

2  See  "The  Examinations  of  Henry  Barrowe  lohn  Grenewood  and 
lohn  Penrie",  [1693,]  as  above. 

n.  9 


130  Early  English  Dissenters 

been  such  discord  was  a  well  known  fact  in  the  early  sixteenth 
century \  but  it  is  strange  to  notice  how  utterly  forgotten  were 
these  disagreements  before  the  publication  of  Browne's  "Re- 
tractation" in  1907.  Barrowe  was  what  might  be  termed  an 
extreme  Puritan.  He  detested  the  name  of  Brownist,  partly  no 
doubt  because  he  was  not  a  Brownist.  Browne  considered  the 
Church  of  England  to  be  imperfect  and  therefore  needing  reform ; 
Barrowe  termed  the  Church  of  England  a  false  Church,  which 
it  was  one's  duty  to  desert,  Browne  became  a  separatist  more 
because  of  pressure  put  upon  him  from  the  Archbishop  and 
Bishops ;  Barrowe  became  a  separatist  in  defiance  of  the  wishes 
of  the  Church  authorities.  Even  as  to  internal  policy  it  is  a 
familiar  fact  through  Dr  Dexter  that  Browne  and  Barrowe 
differed  considerably.  Browne  appears,  too,  to  have  been  dis- 
posed to  give  a  little  more  power  to  the  ordinary  members  of  the 
congregation,  than  Barrowe,  who,  though  his  views  on  this 
point  may  have  been  exaggerated  ^  nevertheless  made  more  of 
the  eldership  than  Browne. 

One  point  in  Barrowe's  life  may  here  be  noticed,  namely, 
that  early  in  1590  he  must  have  been  at  least  temporarily 
out  of  prison.  This  appears  in  a  deposition  of  John  Clerke, 
"  husbandman  of  the  parishe  of  wallsoken  in  the  Countye  of 
Norffolke",  made  early  in  April,  1593,  wherein  he  says  that  he 
"  was  committed  three  yeares  paste  by  the  Sheriffes  of  London 
beinge  taken  in  an  assembly  with  Barrowes". 

Of  only  one  of  Barrowe's  early  published  writings  is  it  my 
purpose  to  make  mention  here,  namely  that  which  gives  his 
ideal  of  a  church,  published  in  1589,  and  entitled  "A  True 
Description  ovt  of  the  V Vorde  of  God,  of  the  Visible  Chvrch ". 
The  opinions  here  expressed  are  undoubtedly  not  entirely 
original,  nor  on  the  other  hand  do  they  at  all  closely  agree  with 
the  earlier  published  views  of  Robert  Browne.  Barrowe  was 
probably  much  more  indebted  to  the  account,  already  mentioned, 
of  the  troubles  of  the  Marian  Exiles  at  Frankfort  on  the  Main, 
first  published  in  1574.  This  narrative  certainly  might  have 
furnished  him  with  abundant  material  out  of  which  to  construct 

1  See  H.  A.[insworth]'s  "  Covuterpoyson  ",  1608,  p.  41. 

2  See  Dr  Powicke's  "Henry  Barrow",  1900,  pp.  105-6. 


The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists  131 

his  own  particular  ideas  of  church  polity.    A  further  comparison 

of  these  two  works  is  suggested  as  a  study  that  may  repay  the 

investigator. 

During  1588  and  1589  the  Martin  Marprelate  tracts  made 

their  first  appearance,  and  for  about  three  years  produced  great 

excitement  in  religious  circles  all  over  England,     It  is  not  our 

purpose  here  to  give  much  space  to  this  controversy.    It  had  no 

direct  connection  with  the  Barrowists,  although  in  indirect  ways 

it  undoubtedly  furthered  their  cause  very  much,     Dr  Dexter 

sought  to  prove  that  Henry  Barrowe  was  Martin,  but  to-day  no 

thoughtful  person  accepts  this  view,  and  while  some  still  think 

that  either  John  Penry  or  Job  Throgmorton  was  Martin,  it 

appears  hardly  probable  that  at  this  late  date  the  true  Martin 

will  ever  be  discovered.     But  whoever  Martin  was,  he  certainly 

was  a  Puritan,  not  a  Barrowist,  at    the    time  he  wrote  the 

Marprelate  tracts,  for  the  Barrowists  of  1588   and  1589   did 

not  think  of  either  Penry  or  Martin  Marprelate  as  in  any  way 

belonging  at  that  time  to  their  congregation  of  separatists. 

This  fact  is  clearly  shown  by  a  letter  of  John  Greenwood's 

which   was  intercepted  and  came  into  the  hands  of  Richard 

Bancroft,  who,  as  is  suggested  by  the  contents  of  his  library,  as 

well  as  by  two  letters  given  in  the  volume  of  documents,  devoted 

much  time  to  studying  the  opinions  and  activities  of  Puritans, 

Barrowists,  and  Brownists.    Says  Greenwood  in  this  intercepted 

letter!  :— 

Surely  it  were  a  notable  worke,  and  no  doubt  might  doe  much  good  in 
these  tim£s,for  some  one  that  God  had  indued  with  sound  iudgement 
and  sharpe  sight,  to  gather  the  maiors  or  antecedents,  of  all  those 
scattered  pamphlets  of  Penries  or  Martins  &c.  and  put  netve  m,inors 
or  conclusions  vnto  them. :  and .  so  in  one  little  nosegay,  but  as  bigg  as 
an  almanack,  to  turne  them  vpon  them-selues,  and  jtresent  them  vnto 
them,  for  an  answere. 

We  may  now  return  to  the  history  of  the  Barrowist  congrega- 
tion, which  at  this  period  was  growing  considerably  in  numbers. 
About  January,  1589/90,  many  of  the  congregation  appear  to 
have  been  taken  prisoners.  Even  up  to  this  time  complete  or- 
ganization had  not  been  effected,  as  is  evident  from  a  deposition 

1  [Richard  Bancroft's]  "A  SVRVAY  |  OF  THE  PRETENDED  |  Holy 
Discipline...",  London,  1593,  p.  430. 

9—2 


132  Early  English  Dissenters 

of  Roger  Waterer^  It  may  have  been  at  this  "  assemblie  in  a 
garden  howse  by  Bedlein,  wher  lames  Forrester  expounded, before 
ther  Churche  was  setled",  that  so  large  a  number  were  captured. 
The  names  of  many  of  the  prisoners  (there  were  apparently 
fifty-two  in  all)  are  new,  though  fourteen  mentioned  in  the  two 
earlier  lists  relating  to  the  congregation  also  appear  in  this ;  as 
John  Francys,  Robert  Batkine  [Badkinge  or  Bodkyne],  Thomas 
Freeman,  George  Collier,  Christopher  Raper  [Roper],  Quintan 
[Quintin]  Smyth,  William  Denford  [Dentforde],  Edeth  Bur- 
rowghe  [Burry],  George  Smels,  Robert  Jackson,  William  Clarke, 
Henry  Barrowe,  John  Greenwood,  and  Edmond  Thomson.  The 
name  John  Sparowe  reminds  us  of  a  member  of  Richard  Fitz's 
congregation  who  had  the  same  name  and  possibly  was  the  same 
person. 

The  other  names,  including  that  of  John  Sparowe,  are  James 
Forester,  Thomas  Settel,  John  Debenham,  Edmond  Nicolson, 
Christopher  Browne,  Androe  [Andrew]  Smyth,  William  Blak- 
borowe,  Thomas  Lemar  [Le  Mare],  Thomas  Michell,  Anthonye 
Clakston,  William  Forester,  Roger  Waterer,  William  Burt, 
Christopher  Bowman,  Nycholas  Lee,  Robert  Andre wes,  William 
Button  [Hawton],  John  Buser  [Bucer],  John  Fissher,  Richard 
Maltusse,  William  Fouller  [Fowler],  Richard  Skarlet,  Roger 
Rippine  [Rippon],  John  Clarke,  Rowland  [Rowlett]  Skipworth, 
George  Knifton,  Richard  Hayward  [Haywood],  John  Lankaster, 
Thomas  Endford  [Eyne worth  or  Kyne worth],  Daniell  Studley, 
Walter  Lane,  John  Nicholas,  William  Dodson  [Dodshoe],  John 
Barrens  [Barnes],  John  Cranford,  Richard  Wheeler,  Thomas 
Canadine,  thirty-eight  in  all. 

Such  a  great  increase  in  numbers  must  have  had  a  cause, 
and  inasmuch  as  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  both  appear  in  the 
list  and  are  no  longer  reported  in  the  Clink,  but  in  the  Fleet, 
I  infer  that  they  had  been  temporarily  released  from  confine- 
ment, and  had  not  been  slow  to  take  advantage  of  this  oppor- 
tunity for  disseminating  their  opinions. 

About  April,  1590,  fifty-nine  Barrowists  were  in  various 
London  prisons,  and  they  then  addressed  a  petition  to  "  Lord 

1  HarL  MS.  6848,  fol.  51  recto. 


The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists  133 

Burleighe"^  In  this  document  nine  new  names  are  given, 
John  Gualter,  Thomas  Reave,  Luke  Hayes,  Richard  Umber- 
field,  Edward  Marshe,  Anthonie  Johnes,  —  Cooke,  —  Awger, 
and  Thomas  Stephens,  the  last  having  died  in  Newgate.  Up 
to  this  time  ten  of  their  number  in  all  had  died. 

Before  the  congregation  was  organized  in  September,  1592, 
we  have  little  further  information  concerning  its  affairs.  The 
membership,  however,  appears  to  have  increased  slightly,  and 
many  of  the  members  who  had  been  imprisoned  in  1589  or 
1590  were  at  liberty  and  present  at  the  organization. 

Those  who  desire  to  become  still  more  familiar  with  the 
opinions  of  the  early  Barrowists  should  consult  the  contents  of 
the  various  manuscripts  published  in  the  volume  of  documents, 
and  especially  two  letters  of  John  Greenwood  written  from 
prison  in  1587  and  Henry  Barrowe's  treatise  stating  and 
defending  four  causes  of  separation,  texts  of  all  three  of  which 
were  fortunately  discovered  by  the  Rev.  T.  G.  Crippen  in  1905, 
and  were  published  in  the  "  Transactions "  of  the  Congrega- 
tional Historical  Society  for  January  and  May,  1906.  These 
"  finds  "  of  Mr  Crippen  bring  to  our  notice  the  most  important 
writings  of  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  that  have  been  discovered 
for  many  years,  if  not  in  modern  times.  Of  these  the  treatise  by 
Barrowe  (not  by  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  jointly,  as  Dr  Powicke 
has  suggested  to  the  author)  is  decidedly  the  most  important. 
It  is  entitled  "  Fower  principall  and  waighty  causes  whie 
every  on  that  knoweth  god  &  acknowledgeth  the  lord  Jesus,  or 
seekethe  salvation  in  him,  ought  spedelye  without  any  delay  to 
forsack  those  disordered  and  ungodlye  &  unholye  sinagogs,  & 
the  false  teachers  of  these  tymes  as  they  genarallye  stand  in 
England  "2. 

1  Lansdowne  MS.  109,  fol.  42  (No.  15),  in  the  British  Museum. 

2  The  discovery  of  this  manuscript  makes  it  possible  for  the  first  time 
to  gain  a  knowledge  of  this  treatise.  Furthermore,  it  gives,  I  believe,  the 
earliest  known  statement  of  the  Four  Causes,  which  later  were  extracted 
from  the  rest  of  the  text  of  this  extended  document,  slightly  altered  and 
expanded  in  form,  introduced  with  six  prefatory  remarks,  termed  "A  Briefe 
Svmme  of  the  causes  6f  our  separation,  and  of  our  purposes  in  practise  ", 
and  defended  and  published  by  Barrowe  in  "A  Plaine  Refvtation  of 
M.  Giflfards  Booke",  1591.     "A  Briefe  Svmme"  was  not  produced  jointly 


134  Early  English  Dissenters 

This  work  was  evidently  written  to  persuade  Puritans  and 
others  to  separate  from  the  Church  of  England,  Here  are  two 
characteristic  passages  which  undoubtedly  made  special  im- 
pression on  those  who  read  the  document,  and  help  to  identify 
it  as  a  general  treatise  of  Barrowe's,  of  which  several  copies 
were  probably  circulated,  and  which  was  evidently  answered  in 
manuscript  by  Robert  Browne,  as  well  as  by  George  Giffard, 
and  possibly,  also,  by  others: — 

The  haynouse  &  fearful!  enormities  that  insue  of  these  ar  Infinitt 
<fe  cannot  be  sufyciently  expresed  ether  by  word  or  writing :  but 
sumarylye,  you  shall  find  herbye  christ  Jesus  denied  in  all  his  ofices, 
&  so  consequently  not  to  be  com  in  the  flesh.  You  shall  find  herby 
the  last  will  and  testament  of  our  savior  christ  abrogat,  his  pretious 
bodie  and  bloud  torne  &  trod  en  under  feette  of  dogges  and  swine, 
christ  Jesus  throwne  out  of  his  howse  &  antichrist  his  enimie  exalted 
above  god  &  raygning  in  the  temple  of  god  as  god  ^ 
but  this  I  say  to  lett  you  see  the  haynoi;s  Dealying  of  the  tolarating 
prechers,  even  those  yt  ar  best  estemed,  and  your  own  fearfull  estate 
that  ar  misled  by  them,  they  as  you  see  betray  not  onlye  themselves 
and  you  but  even  christ  Jesus  hime  self  &  his  gospell  into  the  hands 
of  antichi'ist.  for  see  howe  these  deceivers  ioyn  the  word  of  god  and 
Idollatrye  together,  the  gospell  of  christ  and  bondage,  christ  and 
antichrist  to  gether  in  on  temple.  See  what  kynd  of  gospell  &  what 
kind  of  christ  they  geve  yow  :  a  christ  without  power  to  governe  & 
kep  his  owne,  a  gospell  without  lybertie ;  or  else  whie  ar  you  thus 
Intangled  with  begerlye  rudyments  &c ;  whie  ar  you  thus  in  subjec- 
tion to  the  traditions  of  men  1  thus  mak  they  your  christ  an  Idoll 
&  you  Idolaters,  be  therfor  no  longer  deceved  ;  christ  putethe  not 
up  these  Iniuryes ;  his  father  hathe  delyvered  into  his  hands  all 
power  in  heaven  &  earth,  &  he  will  shortlye  show  himself  with  his 
myghtye  angels  in  flaming  fier,  rendering  vengance  unto  them  that 
know  not  god,  which  ar  disobedient  to  his  gospell :  alsuche  shalbe 
punished  withe  ever  lasting  perdition  from  the  presence  of  the  lorde 
and  from  the  glory  of  his  power,  then  shall  none  of  those  pretensed 
titles  of  graces,  word  of  god,  gospell,  christ  Jesus,  faith,  comfort,  &c. 
serve  them  ;  for  he  whos  eies  ar  a  flam  of  fier  can  not  be  deceved  ;  no 

by  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  as  is  evident  from  the  title-page  of  Barrowe 
and  Greenwood's  "A  Plaine  Refvtation.,.",  1591  [ed.  1606],  in  which  the 
contribution  of  each  writer  is  shown  to  be  quite  distinct  from  that  of 
the  other.  Dr  Powicke  is  therefore  probably  incorrect  in  styHng  "A  Briefe 
Svmme",  "  The  Earliest  Separatist  Manifesto"  ("Henry  Barrow",  Appen- 
dix II.),  as  well  as  in  believing  it  to  have  been  produced  jointly  by  Barrowe 
and  Greenwood. 

1  "Transactions"  for  January,  1906,  p.  292. 


The  Rise  of  the  Barrowists  135 

secrett  is  hiden  from  his  bright  eies.  Though  they  byld  as  highe  as 
babell  &  digg  as  low  as  hell  &c,  he  seeith  ther  hipocrisie  &  will 
disclose  it,  k  will  judg  them  by  ther  fruts,  even  the  bitter  &  accursed 
fruts  of  ther  disobedience,  this  word  of  god,  gospell,  &  christ,  which 
they  use  as  a  snar  &  a  fayer  stall  to  draw  gaynes  &  Ignoi-ant  sowles 
unto  them  &  therby  to  justify  ther  wickednes,  shall  judg  and  con- 
demn them  amongest  the  devells  with  all  ther  knowledg  &  inward 
graces  ikc.  neyther  can  this  fayth  wrought  Vjy  ther  ministrie,  wherby 
they  subtilie  draw  the  wholl  multytud  of  ther  hearers  upon  us ;  as 
who  shold  saye  ye  muste  ether  condemne  all  these  &  every  on  of 
them  to  be  without  faithe  or  Justifey  our  ministry  by  the  efectts. 
alas  we  Judg  not ;  we  with  Jerymey  wishe  even  so  be  it :  but  ther 
is  on  that  Judgeth  them,  even  that  christ  they  boste  of  Judgeth 
them,  (fc  his  word  Judgeth  them  allredye.  ther  is  no  true  faj'the  but 
that  which  is  builte  upon  the  word  k  bringethe  forthe  fruts  accord- 
inglye.  Alias,  the  word  condemneth  them,  ther  fruts  condemne 
them,  yea  them  selves,  when  the  boock  of  ther  consciens  shalbe 
opened  by  the  lyght  of  gods  word  unto  them,  shall  condemne 
themselves.  The  multytud  of  gods  enimies  shalbe  as  one  mane ; 
he  that  spared  not  the  angells,  he  that  spared  not  the  owld  world, 
he  that  spared  not  his  own  people,  cannot  spar  them^ 

1  Ibid.,  pp.  296-7. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  BARROWISTS  UNDER  THE   LEADERSHIP   OF 
FRANCIS  JOHNSON  UNTIL   1597 

Next  to  Henry  Barrowe  the  most  influential  person  who 
joined  Greenwood's  congregation  was  Francis  Johnson.  He 
appeared  on  the  scene  just  at  the  moment  when  a  new  leader 
was  most  needed  to  inspire  the  flagging  energy  of  the  perse- 
cuted separatists.  In  fact,  the  cause  of  English  separatism  had 
never  yet  had  such  a  leader,  for  Johnson  was  a  truly  learned,  as 
well  as  a  conscientious,  man.  Like  other  men  he  had  his  faults, 
but  his  good  characteristics  have  been  largely  overlooked  in 
recent  writings,  and  especially  by  Mr  Edward  Arber,  who 
sums  up  Johnson's  character  in  the  following  comprehensive 
sentence : — 

We  then  come  to  this  judgement  as  to  Francis  Johnson. 
That  by  October  1602,  he  was  a  dead  Christian;  that,  by  then,  he 
was  an  utter  disgrace  to  our  sacred  Faith ;  and  that  what  he  after- 
wards said,  preached,  or  wrote,  is  not  deserving  of  serious  attention, 
from  a  spiritual  point  of  view^. 

Scathing  criticism  this,  but  is  it  not  untrue  as  well  as  un- 
charitable, and  hence  for  the  historian  of  little  value  ?  Johnson 
undoubtedly  was  a  complex  character,  and  the  problems  he  had 
to  face  were  equally  complex,  but  he  stood  loyally  by  the  cause 
he  had  adopted  through  good  and  bad  report  up  to  the  end,  and 
though  at  the  last  he  slightly  altered  his  views,  he  nevertheless 
made  no  deathbed  recantation  as  Mr  Arber,  by  a  curious  error, 
dramatically  declares.  Further,  in  spite  of  all  the  unkind  remarks 
that  were  written  and  published  about  him,  Francis  Johnson 
never  retaliated  in  any  of  his  writings  with  bitter  or  harsh 
terms. 

1  "The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  ",  London,  1897,  p.  112. 


The  Barrowists  under  Francis  Johnson      137 

In  reality  the  career  of  Johnson  is  as  varied  as  it  is  pathetic. 
For  our  purposes,  however,  it  is  necessary  to  allude  only  to  those 
points  in  his  life  which  are  related  to  our  subject.  Late  in  the 
autumn  of  1589  Johnson  was  expelled  from  the  University  of 
Cambridge  and  imprisoned  a  second  time  for  his  religious 
beliefs.  How  long  this  imprisonment  lasted  is  not  apparent, 
but  it  seems  to  have  been  of  considerable  duration.  Some  time 
in  1590  or  1591  he  appears  to  have  arrived  in  Middelburg, 
where  he  was  soon  offered  the  position  of  minister  in  the 
English  church  of  the  Merchant  Adventurers,  not  of  the 
Merchants  of  the  Staple,  as  stated  by  Gov.  Bradford,  Dr  Dexter ^ 
and  other  writers. 

Among  the  Boswell  Papers  in  the  British  Museum  is  a 
paper'^  entitled,  "  Extracts  out  of  y^  Registre  book  of  y*"  English 
Congregacion  at  Antwerpe  A.nno  Do??imj  1597  [.]  80.  81.  82.", 
etc.  These  extracts  explain  how  there  happened  to  be  an 
English  congregation  at  Middelburg  and  tell  hoAv  long  it  had 
been  there.  We  learn  that  in  1579  Walter  Travers  became 
the  minister  of  the  Company  of  Merchant  Adventurers  of 
London  then  in  Antwerp.  Some  time  before  Dec.  17,  1580,  he 
made  a  visit  to  England,  and  on  that  date  the  congregation 
received  a  letter  from  him  excusing  his  failure  to  return  and 
recommending  Cartwright  as  his  successor.  The  "  Companie  " 
moved  from  Antwerp  to  Middelburg  "  in  1582,  or  in  the  be- 
ginning of  1583.  M''  Thomas  Cartwright  being  Minister  hauing 
succeeded  M""  Trauerse",  Cartwright,  therefore,  probably 
reached  Middelburg  after  the  arrival  of  Robert  Browne's  con- 
gregation and  not  before  it,  as  has  usually  been  supposed. 

When  Johnson  became  the  English  minister  at  Middelburg, 
it  will  thus  be  seen,  his  church  had  already  existed  over  ten 
years.  He  had  not  been  long  in  his  new  position,  when  he 
seems  to  have  created  considerable  surprise  by  demanding  that 

1  "The  Congregationalism",  etc.,  New  York,  1880,  p.  263.  This 
mistake  of  Dexter'8  is  evidently  derived  from  Gov.  Bradford's  "A  Dia- 
logue,...", written  in  1648,  and  published  in  Alexander  Young's 
"Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  Boston,  1841,  p.  424.  See  the 
citation  therefrom  given  later  in  this  chapter. 

•^  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  113-14. 


138  Early  English  Dissenters 

all  the  members  of  the  congregation  should  sign  the  text  of 
the  following  document ^  which  is  practically  a  covenant,  though 
not  so  termed  in  this  copy  made  by  Mr  Ferrers : — 

Francis  Johnson  his  articles,  which,  he  vrged  to  be  vnder- 

written  by  the  Englishe  Marchants  in  Middlehoroughe 

in  October.  1591,  withstoode  by  me  Thomas  Ferrers, 

then  deputie  of  the  Com  panic  there./ 

"Wee  whose  names  are  vnderwritten,  doe  beleeve  and  acknow- 
ledge the  truthe  of  the  doctrine  and  faythe  of  our  Lorde  Jesus 
Christe,  which  is  revealed  vnto  vs  in  the  Canon  of  the  Scriptures  of 
the  olde  and  newe  Testament. 

Wee  doe  acknowledge,  that  God  in  his  ordinarie  meanes  for  the 
bringinge  vs  vnto  and  keepinge  of  vs  in  this  faythe  of  Christe,  and 
an  holie  Obedience  thereof,  hath  sett  in  his  Churche  teachinge  and 
rulinge  Elders,  Deacons,  and  Helpers:  And  that  this  his  Ordinance 
is  to  continue  vnto  the  ende  of  the  worlde  as  well  vnder  Christian 
princes,  as  vnder  heathen  Magistrates. 

Wee  doe  willinglie  ioyne  together  to  live  as  the  Churche  of 
Christe,  watchinge  one  over  another,  and  submittinge  our  selves 
vnto  them,  to  whom  the  Lorde  lesus  committeth  the  oversight  of  his 
Churche,  guidinge  and  censuringe  vs  accordinge  to  the  rule  of  the 
worde  of  God. 

To  this  ende  wee  doe  promisse  henceforthe  to  keepe  what  soever 
Christe  our  Lorde  hath  commaunded  vs,  as  it  shall  please  him  by  his 
holie  spiritt  out  of  his  worde  to  give  knowledge  thereof  and  abilitie 
there  vnto. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  this  seems  to  be  a  Puritan  and  not 
a  truly  separatist  document.  Johnson  was  still  a  member  of  the 
Church  of  England  when  he  drew  it  up,  but  by  this  congregation 
it  must,  nevertheless,  have  been  looked  upon  with  suspicion,  for 
though  the  Nonconformist  and  Puritan  preachers  in  the  Church 
of  England  from  the  time  of  Queen  Mary  may  occasionally  have 
employed  covenants,  this  congregation  was  evidently  not  familiar 
with  such  a  written  document  as  this,  and  its  subscription  was 
formally  opposed  by  Mr  Ferrers,  In  fact,  such  an  impression 
did  the  imposition  of  this  covenant  make  upon  Ferrers'  mind, 
that  he  appears  to  have  procured  a  copy  of  it  and  at  some  later 
period  to  have  sent  it  to  Sir  William  Boswell,  thus  rendering  a 
good  service  to  history. 

Johnson  had  evidently  so  emphasized  the  importance  of 
subscribing  these  articles  that  Ferrers  adds  the  two  following 

I  Add.  MS.  28,  571,  fol.  169  recto,  in  the  British  Museum. 


The  Barroivists  under  Francis  Johnson     139 

explanatory  paragraphs.  Probably  Ferrers  feared  that  Johnson 
would  cause  the  church  to  appear  to  manifest  a  tendency  towards 
separatism.  Here  is  what  Ferrers  claims  Johnson  had  declared 
concerning  the  articles  : — 

That  for  anie  which  haue  bene  of  this  Churche  and  will  not 
vnder-write  these  with  proniisse  (as  God  shall  inhable  them)  to 
stande  to  the  same  and  everie  poynte  of  them,  againste  men  and 
Angells  vnto  the  deathe ;  otherwise  he  may  not  be  receaved  as  a 
member  in  this  Churche. 

And  allso  that  any  man  once  havinge  adioyned  him  selfe  to 
this  Englishe  churche  in  Middleboroughe,  he  cannot  fynde  any 
warrant  by  the  worde  of  God ;  [T\  that  after,  the  same  partie  is  to 
adioyne  him  selfe  to  anye  other  Churche,  either  in  Knglande  or  els 
where  :  but  there,  as  the  Discijdine  is  rightlie  established,  as  in  this 
Ghurche.j 

In  the  following  citation  Richard  Bancroft  probably  refers 

indirectly  to  the  drawing  up  of  this  covenant  and  to  the  way  in 

which  Johnson  was  compelled  to  defend  it^ : — 

Diuerse  ministers  well  reckoned  of  heretofore  for  their  learning : 
are  lately  fallen  from  Cartwright,  and  his  secte,  into  another  more 
new  frenzy  of  Barrowisme.  In  a  letter  that  was  taken  not  long 
since :  I  find  some  points  to  this  effect.  The  pi'eachers  of  Midleborow 
and  Flushing,  haue  both  giuen  ouer  their  vnlawftdl  callings.  M. 
Johnson  hath  written  a  most  learned  discourse,  concerning  the  striking 
of  a  newe  couenaunt,  ivith  some  conferences  had  in  that  country-.  It 
is  also  reported,  and  I  am  perswaded,  by  that  which  I  haue  scene, 
that  the  report  is  true:  vz.  that  maister  Penry  is  entered  in  like 
manner  into  this  new  kind  of  couenaunt.  A  matter,  that  would 
seeme  very  strange  vnto  me :  but  that  I  know  the  nature  of 
schismatickes,  to  bee  of  such  giddinesse  :  as  that  no  one  thinge  will 
content  them  longe... 

This  passage  evidently  means  that  Johnson  had  not  found  it 
easy  to  impose  his  covenant  or  articles  upon  the  church  members 
and  had  met  with  unexpected  and  prolonged  opposition  from 
some  of  the  congregation.  Perhaps  he  had  even  been  compelled 
to  acquiesce  in  their  wishes.  The  passage  also  suggests  that  the 
unnamed  English  minister  at  Flushing  had  likewise  advocated 

1  In  "A  Svrvay  of  the  Pretended  Holy  Discipline",  London,  1593, 
p.  427. 

2  Perhaps  Bancroft  thought  that  "  the  striking  of  a  newe  couenaunt " 
was  peculiar  to  Barrowism.  We  now  know  that  such  a  view  is  not 
strictly  true. 


140  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  drawing  up  of  a  covenant,  and,  on  meeting  with  similar 
difficulties,  had  after  a  time  resigned.  As  was  characteristic  of 
him,  Johnson  had  evidently  not  despaired  of  his  situation  because 
of  a  rebuff,  but  had  prepared  a  treatise  (which  probably  was 
never  published)  in  defence  of  his  views.  Before  Bancroft 
wrote  his  "Svrvay"  which  appeared  in  1593,  Johnson  had  also 
become  a  Barrowist  and  relinquished  his  position,  but  whether 
this  had  happened  before  or  after  his  departure  for  England  is 
here  not  clearly  indicated. 

During  his  stay  in  Middelburg  Johnson  like  all  Puritans 
was  in  reality  a  vigorous  opponent  of  separatism,  and  had  been 
delighted  to  discover  Barrowe  and  Greenwood's  "  Plaine  Refvta- 
tion"  while  it  was  in  the  press  some  time  before  March,  1591/2. 
Governor  Bradford  has  so  well  described  this  event  and  so 
carefully  stated  its  traditional  important  effect  on  Johnson's  life, 
that  it  is  here  given  in  fulP: — 

Mr.  Johnson  himself,  who  was  afterwards  pastor  of  the  church  of 
God  at  Amsterdam,  was  a  preacher  to  the  company  of  English  of 
the  Staple  [not  of  the  Staple,  but  of  the  Merchant  Adventurers]  at 
Middleburg,  in  Zealand,  and  had  great  and  certain  maintenance 
["  £200  per  annum."]  allowed  him  by  them,  and  was  highly 
respected  of  them,  and  so  zealous  against  this  way  [of  separation]  as 
that  [when]  Mr.  Barrow's  and  Mr.  Greenwood's  Refutation  of 
Gifford  was  privately  in  printing  in  this  city,  he  not  only  was  a 
means  to  discover  it,  but  was  made  the  ambassador's  instrument  to 
intercept  them  at  the  press,  and  see  them  burnt ;  the  which  charge 
he  did  well  perform,  as  he  let  them  go  on  until  they  were  wholly 
finished,  and  then  surprised  the  whole  impression,  not  suifei'ing  any 
to  escape ;  and  then,  by  the  magisti'ates'  authority,  caused  them  all 
to  be  openly  burnt,  himself  standing  by  until  they  were  all  consumed 
to  ashes.  Only  he  took  up  two  of  them,  one  to  keep  in  his  own 
study,  that  he  might  see  their  errors,  and  the  other  to  bestow  on  a 
special  friend  for  the  like  use.  But  mark  the  sequel.  When  he  had 
done  this  work,  he  went  home,  and  being  set  down  in  his  study,  he 
began  to  turn  over  some  pages  of  this  book,  and  superficially  to  read 
some  things  here  and  there,  as  his  fancy  led  him.  At  length  he  met 
with  something  that  began  to  work  upon  his  spirit,  which  wrought 
with  him  and  drew  him  to  this  resolution,  seriously  to  read  over  the 
whole  book ;  the  which  he  did  once  and  again.  In  the  end  he  was 
so  taken,  and  his  conscience  was  troubled  so,  as  he  could  have  no  rest 

'  In  "A  Dialogue,  or  the  Sum  of  a  Conference  between  some  young 
men  in  New  England  ",  etc.,  pubHshed  in  Alexander  Young's  "  Chronicles 
of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  etc.,  Boston,  1841,  pp.  424-5. 


The  Barrowists  under  Francis  Johnson     141 

in  himself  until  he  crossed  the  seas  and  came  to  London  to  confer 
wdth  the  authors,  who  were  then  in  prison,  and  shortly  after 
executed.  After  which  conference  he  was  so  satisfied  and  confirmed 
in  the  truth,  as  he  never  returned  to  his  place  any  more  at  Middle- 
burg,  but  adjoined  himself  to  their  society  at  London,  and  was 
afterwards  committed  to  prison,  and  then  banished  ;  and  in  con- 
clusion coming  to  live  at  Amsterdam,  he  caused  the  same  books, 
which  he  had  been  an  instrument  to  burn,  to  be  new  printed  and  set 
out  at  his  own  charge.  And  some  of  us  here  present  testify  this  to 
be  a  true  relation,  which  we  heard  from  his  own  mouth  before  many 
witnesses. 

This  story  as  told  by  Bradford  is  most  interesting,  though  in 
the  light  of  evidence  already  given  from  Bancroft's  "  Svrvay  ", 
1593,  it  may  require  some  slight  reconstruction.  From  reading 
Bradford  one  would  think  that  Johnson  voluntarily  gave  up  his 
position  in  Middelburg  after  he  had  been  persuaded  by  Barrowe 
and  Greenwood  in  person  to  abandon  it,  while  on  the  contrary 
there  now  appears  to  be  some  reason  for  believing  that  under 
adverse  conditions  Johnson  may  have  been  prepared  to  re- 
linquish the  Middelburg  pastorate  before  he  ever  saw  Barrowe. 
Just  what  effect  the  reading  of  Barrowe  and  Greenwood's  "  Plaine 
Refvtation  "  had  on  Johnson  is  uncertain.  I  fancy  now  that  in 
his  disappointment  at  finding  that  the  people  in  Middelburg 
would  not  readily  follow  him,  and  were  making  it  difficult  for 
him  to  maintain  his  position  unless  he  would  comply  with 
their  wishes,  he  finally  determined  to  consult  the  leaders  of  the 
separatists  in  London,  whose  work  he  had  so  carefully  read. 
Having  carried  out  this  plan  he  was  quickly  and  fully  con- 
verted to  their  position.  However  this  may  be,  in  less  than  a 
year  from  the  time  when  he  tried  to  impose  his  covenant 
on  the  Middelburg  congregation  he  had  become  pastor  of  the 
London  Barrowists. 

He  was  now  at  last  in  a  congenial  atmosphere,  although,  as 
he  somewhere  tells  us,  he  was  not  in  entire  accord  with  Barrowe. 
The  arrival  and  initiative  of  Johnson  thus  afforded  an  oppor- 
tunity at  last  for  organizing  Greenwood's  congregation  in  an 
acceptable  way,  and  in  September,  1592,  therefore,  the  church 
was  instituted  at  the  house  of  one  Mr  Fox  in  St  Nicholas  Lane, 
London,  where  there  were  present  among  others^ : — 

1  See  the  Deposition  of  Dauiell  Bucke,  Harl.  MS.  6849,  foL  216  recto. 


142 


Early  Eiiglisli  Dissenters 


Robert  Abraham 
Avis  Allen 
lohn  Barnes 
lohn  Beche 
An  Bodkyn 
Christofer  Boman 
Mrs.  Boyes 
Robert  Bray 
Davy  Bristoe 
Daniell  Bucke 
Arthur  Byllet 
William  Collins 
Margery  Daubin 
Christofer  Diggins 
Thomas  Digson 
Peter  Farland[Fair- 
lambe]^ 


Edward  Graue 
lohn  Grenewood 
An  Homes 
Robert  lackson 
Frauncis  lohnes 
George  Knyfton 
Nicholas  Leye[Lee] 

and  his  wife 
Thomas  Lee 
George  Manners 
William  Marshall 
George  Marten 
William  Mason 
Thomas  Michell 
Elizabeth  Moore 
lohn  Nicholas 


Abraham  Pulbery 
lone  Pulbery 
Christofer  Raper 
Roger  Rippon 
Ellyn  Rowe 
Barbera  Sampford 
Mr.  &  Mrs.  Thomas 

Settell 
William  Sheppard 
George  Smell 
Daniel  Studley 
Christofer  Symkins 
Edmund  Thompson 
William  Weber 
Henry  Wythers 


Katherine  Onnyon 

The  attendance  at  the  meetings  evidently  varied  from  60  to  100 

during  this  periods 

The  officers  of  the  congregation  at  its  organization  were, — 

Francis  Johnson,  Pastor. 

John  Greenwood,  Doctor  or  Teacher. 

Daniel  Studley  \ 

^  (Knifton )  (Knifeton  >  Elders. 

'^'^"S''  iKnyftonf  iKnivetonJ 

Nicholas  Lee  )  t-. 

f  Deacons. 
Christopher  Bowman] 

There   are   some   important   particulars   given    in    various 

Barrowist  depositions  (cited  in  full  in  the  volume  of  documents) 

concerning  the  beliefs  and  customs  of  the  congregation.    Among 

these  the  following  may  be  mentioned  : — 

1.     As  to  the  administration  of  baptism. 
Daniel  Bucke  describes  the  baptism  of  seven  children  by 
Johnson  in  the  autumn  of  1592  as  follows : — 

1  Who  in  1606  published  "The  Recantation   of  a  Brownist".     See 
Dr  Powicke's  "Lists",  p.  151. 

-  Deposition  of  Robert  Abiirne,  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  41  recto. 


The  Barrowists  muler  Francis  Johnson     143 

they  [the  congregation]  had  neither  god  fathers  nor  godmothers, 
and  he  tooke  water  and  washed  the  faces  of  them  that  were  baptised  : 
the  Children  that  were  there  baptised  were  the  Children  of  m"' 
Studley  m''  Lee  with  others  beinge  of  seuerall  yeres  of  age,  sayinge 
onely  in  thadministracion  of  this  sacrament  I  doe  Baptise  thee  in  the 
name  of  the  father  of  the  sonne  and  of  the  holy  gost  withoute  vsinge 
any  other  ceriraony  therin  as  is  now  vsually  obser\'ed  accordinge  to 
the  booke  of  Common  praier...^ 

2.     As  to  the  administration  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Daniel  Bucke  also  gives  the  following  minute  description  of 
Johnson's  method  of  administering  the  Lord's  Supper : — 

Beinge  further  demaunded  the  manner  of  the  lordes  supper 
administred  emongst  them,  he  saith  that  fyve  whight  loves  or 
more  were  sett  vppon  the  table  and  that  the  Pastor  did  breake  the 
bread  and  then  deliuered  to  the  rest  some  of  the  said  congregacion 
sittinge  and  some  standinge  aboute  the  table  and  that  the  Pastor 
deliuered  the  Cupp  vnto  one  and  he  to  an  other,  and  soe  from  one  to 
an  other  till  they  had  all  dronkeu  vsinge  the  words  at  the  deliuerye 
therof  accordinge  as  it  is  sett  dowue  in  the  eleventh  of  the 
Corinthes  the  xxiiij*^**  verse-. 

3.     As  to  the  mode  of  excommunication. 

Robert  Aburne,  or  Abraham,  describes  the  excommunication 
of  Robert  Stokes  and  George  Collier  at  some  length^ : — 

He  saieth  that  they  did  vse  to  excommunicate  amongst  them,  and 
that  one  Robert  Stokes,  and  one  George  Collier^,  and  one  or  twoe 
more^  whose  names  he  Remembreth  not,  wear  excommunicated,  for 
that  they  discented  from  them  in  opinion  but  in  what  poynte  he 
Remembreth  not,  and  that  the  said  lohnson  thelder  did  denounce 
thexcommunicacion  against  them,  and  concernynge  the  manner  of 
proceadinges  to  excommunicacion  he  saieth,  that  they  the  said 
Stokes  and  the  Rest  beynge  privatelye  admonished  of  their  pre- 

1  Harl.  MS.  6849,  fol.  216  verso. 

2  Deposition  of  Daniell  Bucke,  Harl.  MS.  6849,  fol.  217  recto. 

3  Deposition  of  Robert  Aburne,  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  41  verso. 

*  As  Dr  Powicke  ("Lists  of  the  Early  Separatists",  p.  155)  points  out, 
Aburne  must  have  made  a  mistake  here  in  stating  that  George  Collier 
was  excommunicated,  for  Thomas  Settle,  examined  on  April  5,  1593,  two 
days  later,  mentions  the  excommunication  of  Stokes  only,  while  Collier 
himself  deposed  that  he  would  not  attend  the  services  of  his  Parish 
Church  in  order  to  regain  his  liberty. 

°  Philipp  Merriman  also  seems  to  have  licen  excommunicated  about 
this  time.     See  G.  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  p.  7. 


144  Ea7'ly  English  Dissenters 

tended  errors,  and  not  conforminge  them  selves,  and  by  Witnes 
produced  to  their  congregacion,  then  the  said  lohnson,  with  the 
Consent  of  the  whole  Congregacion,  did  denounce  the  excommunica- 
cion,  and  that  sithence  they  weare  excomunicated  which  was  a  halfe 
yere  and  somewhat  more  sithence,  they  wear  not  admitted  into  their 
Churche  /. 

4.     As  to  7narriage. 

Christopher  Bowman,  one  of  the  two  deacons,  held  the 
opinion  "  that  mariage  in  a  howse  without  a  mynister  by 
Consent  of  the  parties  and  frends  is  sufficient  "^ 

5.     As  to  the  Lord's  Prayer. 

John  Nicholas  of  Smithfield,  Glover,  in  his  deposition  taken 
on  March  8,  1592,  said  "  that  the  Lords  prayer  is  noe  praier  for 
that... Christ  did  not  saie  it  as  a  praier  "^ 

It  might  be  added  here  that  one  of  the  members  of  the 
congregation  named  Abraham  Pulbury  who  had  been  "  prest  for 
a  souldier",  was  taken  prisoner  while  carrying  a  sword.  This 
fact  seems  to  have  suggested  to  the  authorities  that  the  Barrow- 
ists  possibly  intended  an  insurrection  if  they  secured  sufficient 
support,  and  several  of  the  congregation,  who  had  been  im- 
prisoned, were  questioned  on  this  point.  All  who  were  thus 
examined  deposed  that,  so  far  as  they  knew,  the  separatists  had 
no  intention  of  disturbing  the  peace  of  the  country. 

Richard  Bancroft  in  "A  SVRVAY  |  OF  THE  PRE- 
TENDED |  Holy  Discipline",  London,  1593,  has  preserved 
some  important  particulars  concerning  the  early  Barrowists^ : — 

you  may  assure  your  selues,  that  this  latter  schisme  groweth  on 
very  fast.  In  somuch,  that  as  Cartwright  and  his  Vjrethren  beganne, 
eight  or  nine  yeares  since,  to  sett  vppe,  and  put  in  practise,  theyr 
Geneuian  discipline :  so  doe  these  newe  vpstartes,  beginne  to  erecte 
in  diuerse  places,  theyr  Barrowish  synagogues,  and  I  knowe  not  what 
cages  of  franticke  schismatickes.  One  Collins  a  man  amongest  them, 
not  vnlearned  (as  it  seemeth)  doeth  write  in  this  sorte  hereof. 
Ecclesia  potenti  eius  dextra  adiuta,  d'c.  The  church  assisted  with  the 
mightie  right  hand  of  God,  hath  chosen  ministers :  Maister  lohnson 
for  her  pastor :  Maister  Greenwood  for  her  Doctor :  Maister  Studly 
and  Maister  George  Knife[ton],  for  her  Elders :    Nicholas  Lee  and 

1  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  70  verso.  2  jf^i^^^  fol.  61  recto. 

3  P.  429,  but  incorrectly  printed  249. 


The  Barroivists  timler  Francis  Johnson    145 

Christopher  Browne  [Bowman]  for  her  Deacons.  The  other  assembly 
also  {vjherevnto  are  added,  lohn  Nicholas :  Thomas  Michell :  lohn 
Barnes,  and  some  others  with  m,ee)  with  Gods  assistauuce,  will  beginne 
out  of  hand,  to  create  vnto  it  selfe  ministers. 

From  this  passage  it  appears  that  in  or  before  September, 
1592,  when  Johnson's  congregation  was  organized,  there  was 
also  another  company  of  separatists  in  London  to  whom  after 
that  date  were  added  "  John  Nicholas :  Thomas  Michell :  John 
Barnes,  and  some  others  with  "  William  Collins  S  who  likewise 
"  with  Gods  assistaunco  "  intended  shortly  to  institute  another 
church.  Apparently  Collins  was  taking  the  leading  part  in  this 
movement,  and  even  Bancroft  can  only  remark  that  he  was  "not 
vnlearned  (as  it  seemeth) ",  surely  an  unexpected  admission. 

Like  the  London  congregation  of  Queen  Mary's  time,  John- 
son's church  did  not  often  meet  in  the  same  place.  For  example, 
we  learn  from  the  depositions  that  they  congregated  in  Mr 
Boyse's  house  in  Fleet  Street,  in  the  wood  by  or  beyond 
Islington,  at  the  constable's  house  in  Islington,  at  Roger 
Rippon's  house  in  Southwark,  in  the  field  or  wood  near 
Deptford,  in  a  garden  house  by  "  Bedlein  ",  in  the  house  of  one 
Fox  in  St  Nicholas  Lane,  in  Nicholas  Lee's  house  in  Cow  Lane, 
at  Penry's  house,  in  John  Barnes'  house  in  Ducklane,  in  a  house 
at  Sraithfield  by  St  Bartholomew's  Hospital  (?)^  at  Mr  Bilson's 
house  near  Christchurch,  in  Daniel  Bucke's  house  at  Aldgate 
within  the  wall,  in  the  house  of  "  one  Lewes  in  Stopney  ",  and 
in  a  Schoolhouse  in  St  Nicholas  Lane^  probably  where  George 
Johnson  was  schoolmaster. 

The  Barrowists  evidently  now  began  still  further  to  increase 
in  numbers.  In  the  various  depositions  we  are  told  the  names, 
occupations,  addresses,  and  age  of  many  of  the  members,  which 
it  may  be  of  value  to  give  : — 

^  Collins  was  imprisoned  in  Sussex  with  Abraham  Pulbery  [Pulbury] 
about  April,  1592.     See  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  47  verso. 

2  See  the  depositions  of  Robei't  Abraham  on  April  3,  1593,  and  of 
Christopher  Bowman  on  April  4,  of  the  same  year,  in  the  volume  of 
documents. 

3  In  this  schoolhouse  Francis  Johnson  seems  to  have  administered 
baptism  to  several  children  about  Christmas,  1592. 

B.  10 


146  Em*ly  English  Dissenters 

Robert  Abraham,  or  Aburne,  Leatherdresser,  and  servant  to 
Thomas  Rookes,  St  Olave's,  Southwark,  about  26  years  old. 

John  Barnes  of  Ducklane,  Taylor,  about  26  years  old. 

Arthur    Billet    "of    llanteglos    by    Fowhey    in    Cornwell 
Scholler",  about  25  years  old. 

Robert  Bodkin  of  Gray's  Inn  Lane,  Taylor. 

Christopher  Bowman  of  Smithfield,  Goldsmith,  about 
32  years  old.     Imprisoned  4  years,  and  again  later. 

Edward  Boyes,  Haberdasher,  Fleet  St.,  33  years  old^ 

David  Bristow  or  Bristoe,  Tailor,  St  Martin  le  Grand, 
30  years  old^. 

Henry  Brodewater  of  St  Nicholas  Lane,  Scrivener,  about 
29  years  old. 

Daniel  Bucke  of  Southwark,  Scrivener. 

John  Gierke,  or  Clarke,  "  of  walsotkon  in  Norffolk  husband- 
man ",  about  50  years  old.     Imprisoned  3  years  and  more. 

William  Gierke  of  St  Botolph's,  a  worker  of  caps,  about 
40  years  old. 

George  Collier,  "  of  the  parishe  of  S*^  Martens  at  Ludgate  ", 
Haberdasher,  38  years  old.  Imprisoned  for  5  years  and  never 
examined  until  that  time  had  passed. 

William  Curland  of  Deptford,  Shipwright,  about  30  years  old. 

John  Dalamore  of  Bath,  "  Brodeweaver  ",  about  25  years  old. 

William  Darvall,  Carpenter,  Shoreditch,  25  years  old^ 

William  Denford  of  Fosterlane,  Schoolmaster,  50  years  old. 

Christopher  Diggins  of  St  Olave's  in  Southwark,  Weaver, 
about  24  years  old. 

Thomas  Emery,  fellow-servant  of  William  Giles. 

Edward    Gilbarte,    servant    of    Isaac    Frize,    Trunkmaker, 

21  years  old. 

William  Giles,  Taylor,  servant  to  Mr  Cheryatt  of  "  walbroke", 

22  years  old. 

Edward  Grave  of  St  Botolph's  in  Thames  Street,  Fishmonger, 
about  25  years  old. 

Richard  Hawton,  or  Howton,  Shoemaker,  deceased  before 

Apr.  3,  1593. 

*  Taken  from  Dr  Powicke's  "  Lists  of  the  Early  Separatists  ". 
2  Ibid.  3  jf^icl. 


The  Barrovmts  under  Francis  Johnson     147 

Thomas  Hewet  "  of  S''  Martyns  Le  grand  pursemaker  ",  born 
at  Swanton  in  Leicestershire,  about  30  years  old. 

John  Huckes,  Shipwright,  born  at  Chatham,  about  21  years 
old>. 

Francis  Johnson,  Minister,  Pastor  of  the  congregation,  about 
31  years  old. 

George  Johnson,  kite  Schoohnaster  in  St  Nicholas  Lane, 
born  in  "  Richmonshire "  "  in  the  Countie  of  yorke ",  about 
29  years  old.  After  his  brother's  imprisonment  he  sometimes 
preached  before  the  congregation^. 

George  Knifton,  or  Kniveton,  "of  Newgate  market  potecary", 
about  24  years  old. 

William  Marshall  of  Wapping,  ShipAvright,  32  years  old. 
He  attended  Church  as  well  as  this  congregation. 

Richard  Mason,  brother  of  the  following. 

William  Mason  of  Wapping,  Shipwright,  about  34  years 
old. 

Thomas  Micklefield,  "  loyner ",  of  St  Mary  Overy's  parish, 
33  years  old. 

Thomas  Mitchell  of  London,  Turner,  about  30  years  old. 

John  Nicholas  of  the  parish  of  St  "  Pulchres ",  London, 
Glover,  about  36  years  old.  Imprisoned  more  than  3  years  in 
the  Gate  House,  Westminster. 

Katherine  Onyon,  Spinster,  "  dwellinge  at  Allgate  ",  and  is 
reported  as  willing  to  go  to  Church,  but  is  unable  to  give 
sureties. 

John  Parkes,  Clothworker,  servant  of  "  m*"  Livesey  his 
Sonne",  50  years  old. 

John  Penrie,  Clerk,  about  30  years  old. 

Leonard  Pidder,  or  Pedar,  of  "  blacke  Friers  ",  30  years  old. 

Abraham  Pulbury  of  the  parish  of  "  Crichurche  ",  "  purse- 
maker  by  trade,  but  free  of  the  Coupers  ",  about  24  years  old. 

Thomas  Settle  "  late  of  Cowlane ",  Minister  ordained  by 
Bishop  Freake,  about  38  years  old. 

Christopher  Simkins  of  Aldersgate  Street,  Coppersmith, 
about  22  years  old. 

1  Ibid. 

2  See  the  deposition  of  Robert  Aburne,  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  41  recto. 

10—2 


148  Early  English  Dissenters 

George  Smelles  of  "  Fynchelane  ",  Taylor,  about  40  years  old. 

Quintin  Smyth  of  Southwark,  Feltmaker,  about  30  years  old. 

William  Smythe  of  Bradford  in  Wiltshire,  Minister  ordained 
by  the  Bishop  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield,  and  licensed  to  preach 
by  the  Bishop  of  Sarum,  about  30  years  old.  He  came  to 
London  late  in  January,  or  early  in  February,  1592/3,  to  confer 
with  Johnson,  Greenwood,  and  others. 

John  Sparrow,  Fishmonger  of  London,  60  years  old^ 

James  Tailor. 

Roger  Waterer,  late  servant  to  Robert  Pavye  of  St  Martin's, 
Ludgate,  Haberdasher,  about  22  years  old.  Imprisoned  three 
and  a  quarter  years. 

William  Weaver  of  Gray's  Inn  Lane,  Shoemaker,  about 
40  years  old. 

Henry  Withers  of  Deptford  Strand,  Shipwright,  about 
27  years  old. 

To  this  list  may  be  added  the  name  of  "Thomas  Farret 
servant  to  William  Greene  of  Aldersgate  streete",  who  is 
mentioned  in  a  paper ^  containing  the  names  of  eight  "Sectaries" 
who  conformed  and  were  released  on  bail,  the  other  seven  being 
John  Hulkes  or  Huckes,  William  Mason,  William  Curland, 
Edward  Gilbert,  Henry  Brodewater,  Thomas  Mihiltield,  or 
Micklefield,  and  Henry  Withers,  previously  mentioned. 

By  a  comparison  of  the  various  facts  here  given  some 
interesting  points  are  suggested: — 

1.  Most  of  the  members  were  men  under  thirty-five  years  of 
age,  very  few  were  over  forty  years  of  age. 

2.  Certain  shipwrights  (principally  of  Deptford  Strand) 
had  been  connected  with  the  congregation,  but  most,  if  not  all, 
of  them  conformed  and  were  released  on  bail. 

3.  The  members  came  from  various  places,  a  few  even  from 
towns  somewhat  distant  from  London. 

Just  about  the  time  of  the  execution  of  Barrowe  and  Green- 
wood the  Barrowists  prepared  at  least  two  supplications  and  one 
petition.     One  of  the  supplications  is  given  by  John  Strype  in 

1  Taken  from  Dr  Powicke's  "  Lists  of  the  Early  Separatists  ". 

2  Harl.  MS.  6848,  fol.  210.     This  list  is  given  in  full  in  the  volume  of 
documents. 


The  Barrowists  under  Francis  Johnson     149 

the  "  Annals  of  the  Reformation  "\  The  other  supplication  and 
the  petition  are  to  be  found  in  Harleian  MS.  6848-  in  the 
British  Museum.  Of  the  latter  two,  complete  texts  are  given 
in  the  volume  of  documents.  From  these  petitions  and  suppli- 
cations we  may  glean  several  facts  concerning  the  history  of  the 
congregation  at  this  time. 

1.  In  the  firet  place,  we  may  infer  from  the  frequent 
capture  of  members  of  the  congregation,  that  most  of  those 
taken  before  the  execution  of  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  were  not 
imprisoned  for  long  periods  of  time. 

2.  These  Barrowists,  or  Johnsonians,  looked  upon  them- 
selves as  veritable  successors  of  the  "  persecuted  Church  & 
Martyres  "  of  Queen  Mary's  reign.  In  fact,  they  even  went  so 
far  as  to  hold  their  meetings  sometimes  in  the  same  place  where 
the  members  of  that  church  "  were  enforced  to  vse  the  like 
exercise  in  Queene  Maryes  dayes",  and  on  March  4,  1592/3, 
the  members  of  Johnson's  congregation  were  taken  captive  on 
this  very  spot. 

3.  It  appears  that  in  March,  1592/3,  seventeen  or  eighteen 
of  the  church  had  died  in  the  London  prisons  "  within  these  .6. 
yeeres"  (which  statement  suggests  that  the  imprisonment  of 
members  of  the  congregation  began  in  1587  not  in  1586,  as 
has  hitherto  been  supposed). 

4.  In  spite  of  the  capture  of  fifty-six  members  on  March  4, 
1592/3,  many  of  the  Barrowists  were  "by  the  mercy  of  GoD 
still  out  of  theyr  [persecutors']  handes  ". 

5.  By  March  11,  1592/3,  there  were  about  seventy-two  of 
their  number  in  the  London  prisons  "  (not  to  speake  of  other 
Gaoles  throughout  the  Land)  ",  of  whom  sixteen  must  already 
have  been  imprisoned  for  some  time. 

Just  how  steadfast  in  their  opinions  Barrowe,  Greenwood, 
and  Penry  were  at  the  end  of  their  lives,  is  a  question  which 
needs  some  investigation.  The  loyal  Congregationalist  of  to- 
day is  likely  to  look  back  at  these  men  as  martyrs  for  their 
opinions,  and  such  in  a  sense  they  certainly  were,  but  this  is  not 

>  Vol.  IV.,  ed.  1731,  pp.  93-8.     The  original  of  this  document  may 
be  Lansdowne  MS.  75,  fol.  42. 
2  Fol.  150  recto,  and  fol.  2-6. 


150  Early  English  Dissenters 

saying  that  they  were  entirely  and  finally  satisfied  with  the 
views  for  which  they  had  suffered  so  much. 

The  Puritan,  John  Cotton,  one  of  the  most  noted  and 
respected  divines  of  early  New  England,  at  any  rate,  did  not 
believe  so,  for  he  tells  the  following  story  concerning  them, 
which  he  claims  is  well  authenticated^ : — 

And  it  is  alike  [sic]  mistake,  when  he  maketh  M"".  Penry  one  of  his 
witnesses  unto  the  death  for  Separation.  I  have  received  it  from 
M''.  Ilildersom  [Ilildersham]  (a  man  of  a  thousand)  that  M''.  Penry 
did  ingenuously  acknowledge  before  his  death,  That  though  he  had 
not  deserved  death  for  any  dishonour  put  upon  the  Queene,  by  that 
Booke  (which  was  found  in  his  study,  and  intended  by  himselfe  to  be 
presented  to  her  own  hand :)  nor  by  the  compiling  of  Martin  Mar- 
prelate,  (of  both  which  he  was  falsly  charged;)  yet  he  confessed,  he 
deserved  death  at  the  Queenes  hand,  for  that  he  had  seduced  many  of 
her  loyall  Subjects  to  a  separation  from  hearing  the  Word  of  life  in  the 
Parish  Churches.  Which  though  himselfe  had  learned  to  discerne  the 
evill  thereof,  yet  he  cordd  never  prevaile  to  recover  divers  of  her 
Subjects,  tvhom  he  had  seduced:  and  therefore  the  blond  of  their 
soules,  was  now  justly  required  at  his  hands'^. 

1  In  his  "  The  Bloudy  Tenent,  Wasihed,  And  made  white  in  the  blood 
of  the  Lam  be  :...  Whereunto  is  added  a  Reply  to  Mr.  Williams  Answer,  to 
Mr.  Cottons  Letter",  London,  1647,  the  last  half,  pp.  117-18. 

2  The  case  of  Penry  is  somewhat  perplexing,  though  it  now  seems 
probable  that  he  was  not  really  a  witness  "  unto  the  death  for  Separa- 
tion ",  as  we  understand  that  term,  in  the  sense  of  a  perpetual  revolt  from 
a  State  Church  as  false  in  essence.  Of  Mr  Hildersham's  testimony  here 
cited,  I  have  no  confirmation,  and  do  not  consider  it  sufficiently  con- 
vincing. Penry,  however,  has  left  various  writings  which  give  us  trust- 
worthy expositions  of  his  views,  and  especially  his  extended  Confession  of 
Faith  and  Apology,  the  original  MS.  of  which  I  have  rediscovered  and 
consulted.  In  this  manuscript  occurs  the  following  remarkable  state- 
ment : — 

"  I  detest  all  heresies,  sectes  and  schysmes  and  errors  whether  new  or  old, 
by  whomsoeuer  they  haue  been  inuented.  as  Puritanisme,  Donatisme, 
Anabaptisme,  Libertinisme  Brownisme,  all  the  dreames  and 
dotages  of  the  famylie  of  loue,  but  especyally  all  Popery,  ..." 

This  outspoken  and  comprehensive  detestation  Penry  is  quick  to 
explain  and  qualify  in  what  follows,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  volume  of 
documents.  Evidently  he  still  believes  as  much  as  ever  in  the  Church  of 
England  as  a  national  institution,  he  agrees  with  its  principal  doctrines,  he 
does  not  call  it  a  false  church,  but  nevertheless  he  wishes  certain  abuses 
removed  before  he  will  again  have  anything  to  do  with  the  State  Church. 

As  the  time  of  his  execution  drew  near,  Penry  wrote  a  final  letter  to 


The  Barroioists  under  Francis  Johnson    151 

Touching  his  other  witnesse,  to  the  death  of  jNI"".  Barroiv,  this 
I  can  say,  from  the  testimony  of  holy  and  blessed  M''.  [John]  Dod, 
who  speaking  of  this  M"".  Barroiv,  God  is  not  wont  (saith  he)  to  make 
choice  of  men,  infamous  for  grosse  vices  before  their  calling,  to  make 
them  any  notable  instruments  of  Reformation  after  their  Galling. 
M"".  Barrow  whitest  he  lived  in  Court,  was  wont  to  be  a  go-eat  Gamster, 
and  Dicei',  and  often  getting  much  by  play,  would  boast.  Vivo  de  die, 
in  spem  noctis,  nothing  ashamed  to  boast  of  his  hopes  of  his  nights 
lodgings  in  the  bosomes  of  his  Courtizens.  As  his  spirit  was  high  and 
rough  before  his  reformatiooi,  so  -vms  it  after,  even  to  his  death.  When 
he  stood  under  the  Gibbet,  he  lift  up  his  eyes,  and  Lord  (saith  he)  if  I 
be  deceived,  thou  hast  deceived  me^ :  And  so  being  stopt  by  the  hand  of 

Burghley  on  May  28,  1593.  In  this  he  speaks  of  not  being  wholly  able  to 
accord  in  religious  views  with  those  who  held  the  evidence  against  him, 
but  if  his  life  should  be  spared,  he  seems  to  have  intended  to  do  what  he 
could  "for  the  apeasing  &  quiet  taking  vp,  of  the  differences  in  relligion 
between  mee  [him]  &  the  Ecclesiasticall  estate  of  this  land  ".  We  are  left 
to  surmise  how  far  the  effort  to  appease  would  have  carried  him. 

It  should,  however,  be  remembered  that  Penry  to  the  end  loyally 
clung  to  this  Barrowist  congregation,  and  encouraged  the  other  members 
to  do  so,  while  his  daughter.  Deliverance,  followed  the  Barrowists  to 
Amsterdam.  How  Penry  could  consistently  do  all  this  may  seem  strange, 
but  his  case  presents  one  of  the  problems  which  often  meet  the  historian 
and  embarrass  him  in  drawing  his  conclusions.  If  the  congregation  in 
London  was  not  really  separatist,  the  situation  would  be  much  clearer. 
It  should  be  added  that  the  Barrowists  thought  of  Penry  as  a  "  faithfull 
Martyr  of  lesus  Christ"  (F.  Johnson's  "Certayne  Reasons",  1608,  4°, 
p.  iii). 

Penry's  Apology  also  appears  to  me  to  favour  the  view  that  he  was  in 
Scotland  for  a  considerable  period  of  time,  and  that  he  did  not  leave  that 
country  until  the  autumn  of  1592.  This  opinion  is  further  confirmed  by 
the  dates  of  the  two  letters  published  in  the  "  sixt  Addition  "  of  Ephraim 
Pagitt's  "  Heresiography ",  London,  1661,  8°,  pp.  271-275.  The  first  was 
"Written  from  Edinburgh  in  Scotland,  Apr.  30.  In  34th.  of  the  Queen 
[i.e.,  1592]",  and  the  second  was  "Written  also  from  Edinhurgk  in 
Scotland.  March  1.  In  33th.  of  the  Queen  [i.e.,  1591]."  The  dates  of  these 
letters  entirely  invalidate  the  opinions  of  the  Rev.  T.  Gasquoiue,  B.A., 
expressed  in  an  article  in  the  "Transactions"  of  the  Congregational 
Historical  Society  (for  Sept.,  1907),  entitled,  "The  Last  Years  of  Penry". 
After  his  arrival  in  London  in  1592,  Penry  seems  to  have  been  constantly 
moving,  as  is  indicated  in  his  deposition  of  April  5,  1593. 

1  Hanbury  in  his  "Memorials",  p.  62,  note  "a",  approves  of  the 
ingenious  suggestion  made  by  Thomas  Wall  in  "More  Work  for  the 
Dean",  1681,  that  Barrowe  is  here  quoting  Jeremiah  xx.  7.  I  have  no 
objection  to  that  interpretation,  if  it  meets  with  special  fovoiu",  only  I 


152  Early  English  Dissenters 

God,  he  was  not  able  to  "proceed  to  speake  any  thing  to  purpose  more, 
either  to  the  glory  of  God,  or  to  the  edification  of  the  people. 

M''.  Greenwood. .  .indeed  of  all  the  rest  was  the  more  to  be  lamented, 
as  being  of  a  more  tender,  and  conscientious  spirit :  but  this  have  I 
heard  reported  of  him  by  the  same  credible  hands.  That  if  be  could 
have  been  sundi'ed  from  M"'.  Barrow,  he  was  tractable  to  have  been 
gained  to  the  truth. 

It  was  in  this  year  1593  that  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  speaking 
in  Parliament  concerning  the  Brownists,  stated  his  belief  that 
there  were  "  near  twenty  thousand  of  them  in  England  "\  This 
estimate  is  absurd  unless  Raleigh  included  Puritans  in  it,  but 
whether  he  included  them  or  not,  we  can  be  practically  certain 
that  his  opinion  is  of  little  value,  and  that  various  more  accurate 
statements  concerning  the  number  of  Brownists  at  later  dates 
show  that  at  no  time  before  1630,  and  possibly  even  before  1640, 
can  there  have  been  more  than  five  or  six  hundred  genuine 
Brownists  or  Barrowists  in  England,  while  the  presence  of  even 
a  smaller  number  would  exceed  reasonable  probability. 

The  execution  of  Barrowe,  Greenwood,  and  Penry  undoubt- 
edly had  some  effect  on  the  attitude  taken  by  the  public  towards 
the  Barrowists.  No  more  of  them  were  put  to  death,  but  never- 
theless the  government  seems  to  have  been  determined,  if 
possible,  to  get  rid  of  them.  It  is  probable  that  after  this  all 
the  leading  men  were  kept  in  prison  without  cessation,  though 
as  will  be  seen  in  the  next  chapter,  most  of  the  other  members 
of  the  congregation  were  soon  given  their  freedom. 

In  1596,  in  order  to  make  their  position  more  plain,  the  first 


would  observe  that  it  does  not  disprove  in  the  least  that  Barrowe  meant 
what  he  said,  nor  does  it  in  any  way  invalidate  the  testimony  of  John  Dod, 
who  must  have  been  one  of  the  most  honest,  peaceable,  and  gentle  of  the 
Puritans  of  that  time,  and  may  have  been  a  witness  of  Barrowe's  death. 
Dod's  account,  at  any  rate,  appears  to  be  the  most  reliable  one  we  have  of 
Barrowe's  execution,  for  wlaile  we  could  wish  for  further  particulars,  it 
does  not  lack  elements  of  credibility.  What  a  different  report  it  is  from 
that  circulated  by  "  Miles  Mickle-bound  "  and  later  by  Governor  Bradford, 
which  even  Dr  Powicke  is  constrained  to  say  "  sounds  rather  apocryphal 
("Henry  Barrow")"! 

^  Sir  Simonds  D'Ewes  "  The  Journals  of  all  the  Parliaments,  During 
the  Reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth",  London,  1682,  p.  517. 


The  Barroivists  under  Francis  Johnson    153 

edition  of  the  Barrowists'  "Trve  Confession"  of  Faith  was  issued. 
It  is  a  thin,  rather  poorly  printed,  quarto  of  only  a  few  pages, 
but  is  an  important  document,  as  it  gives  the  principal  opinions 
of  the  separatists  of  that  period.  I  can  find  no  reliable  evidence 
that  Henry  Ainsworth  had  anything  to  do  with  this  Confessions 
but  the  hand  of  Francis  Johnson  is  clearly  to  be  seen  therein, 
and  from  it  we  get  the  earliest  published  expression  of  his  views. 

In  the  Preface  the  execution  is  mentioned  of  "  one  William 
Dennis  /  at  Thetford  in  Northfolke  ",  as  well  as  the  fact  that  "24 
soules  have  perished  in  their  [the  Prelates'  ?]  prisons  /  with  in  the 
Cittie  of  London  /  only  (besides  other  places  of  the  Land)  &  that 
of  late  yeeres  [i.e.,  before  1593]  ".  In  the  margin  the  names  of 
these  unfortunate  people  are  mentioned  as  follows : — 

In  Newgate. 
Mr  [Nicholas]  Crane,  about  sixty  years  of  age. 
Richard  Jackson. 
Thomas  Stevens. 
William  Howton  [Hawton]. 
Thomas  Drewet. 
John  Gwalter. 
Roger  Ryppon. 
Robert  Awoburne  [Aburnej. 
Scipio  Bellot. 
Robert  Bowie. 
John    Barnes   "  beeing   sic  /  vnto    death  /  was   caryed   forth    & 

departed / this  life  shortly  after". 
Mother  Maner,  sixty  years  of  age. 
Mother  Roe,  sixty  years  of  age. 
Anna  Tailour. 
Judeth  Myller. 

Margaret  Farrer  "  beeing  sick  vnto  death  was  caried  forth  /  and 
ended  her  lyfe  within  a  day  or  two  after." 

In  Bridewell. 
John  Purdy  [Pardy  ?]. 

In  the  Gatehouse. 
Mr  Denford,  about  sixty  years  of  age. 

1  It  will  be  seen  later  that  it  ia  exceedingly  improbable  that  Ainsworth 
was  "teacher"  of  the  congregation  in  1596. 


154  Early  English  Dissenters 

In  the  White  Lyon. 
Father  Debenhara,  about  seventy  years  of  age. 

In  Woodstreet  Counter. 
George  Bryty  [Dingthie  ?]. 
Thomas  Hewet. 

In  the  Clink. 
Henry  Thompson. 

In  the  Poultry  Counter. 
John  Chandler  "beeing  sick  vnto  death  was  carryed  forth  & 
dyed  "  within  a  few  days. 

In  the  Fleet. 
Walter  Lane. 

As  this  previously  mentioned  Confession  is  given  in  Professor 
Williston  Walker's  "  Creeds  and  Platforms  of  Congrega- 
tionalism", further  mention  of  its  contents  seems  to  be  un- 
necessary. 

In  1597,  when  the  leaders  of  the  congregation  no  longer  saw 
any  hope  of  gaining  their  release  and  of  living  undisturbed  in 
England  or  even  anywhere  else  in  Europe,  they  finally  petitioned 
to  be  allowed  to  emigi'ate  to  Canada.  The  story  of  how  they 
escaped  from  their  expected  fate,  of  how  one  of  their  vessels  was 
shipwrecked  without  any  loss  of  life,  and  of  how  the  exiles 
returned  to  London  and  finally  reached  Holland,  has  been  so 
well  told  by  Dr  Dexter  that  there  is  no  need  of  repeating  it 
here. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  BARROWISTS  ON   THE  CONTINENT 

Not  long  after  the  execution  of  Barrowe,  Greenwood,  and 
Penry  all  of  the  Barrowists  except  the  leaders  were  apparently 
released  from  prison,  and  seeing  the  helplessness  of  their  cause 
in  England,  resolved  to  accept  a  proffered  exile  in  Hollands 
The  movement  thither  evidently  commenced  in  1593^  What 
difficulties  lay  before  them  even  in  that  peaceful  country  can 
hardly  have  dawned  on  their  weary  minds  as  they  set  sail  from 
the  land  of  their  birth.  Outcasts  at  home,  they  soon  found  only 
a  chilly  welcome  in  the  Low  Countries.  It  is  to  be  especially 
noticed  that  they  did  not  visit,  or  settle  in,  Middelburg.  Earlier 
separatists  had  not  fared  well  there.  The  dissensions  between 
Browne  and  Harrison  were  still  fresh  in  their  memory,  and  the 
later  experience  of  Francis  Johnson  with  Thomas  Ferrers  had 
plainly  manifested  that  even  the  slightest  suspicion  of  a  tendency 
toward  separatism  was  certain  to  arouse  antagonism.  For  some 
reason,  also,  the  company  did  not  at  first  go  to  Amsterdam. 
Very  probably  the}'  wished  to  hide  themselves  in  some  more 
remote  spot  where  fewer  English  people  would  cross  their  path 
and  seek  to  injure  their  prospects. 

The   earliest  emigrants  of  the   congregation   to  arrive  in 

1  "An  Act  to  retain  the  Queen's  Majesty's  Subjects  in  their  due 
Obedience  "  had  been  passed  by  Parliament  between  Feb.  19  and  April  10, 
1592/3  (See  "The  Statutes  at  Large  From  the  First  Year  of  King  Edward 
the  Fourth  To  the  End  of  the  Reign  of  Queen  EHzabeth  ",  London,  Vol.  il., 
1786,  p.  658).  This  act  would  suggest  that  the  emigration  of  the 
Barrowists  may  have  taken  place  within  three  months  after  the  latter 
date. 

2  See  Francis  Johnson's  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas 
White",  1606,  p.  63. 


156  Early  English  Dissenters 

Holland  seem  at  first  to  have  settled  at  Campen  [Cam pin]  ^  and 
about  1595  to  have  removed  to  Naarden  [Narden],  for  Francis 
Johnson  writing  in  1606  says-: — 

Here  he  excepteth  onely  against  one  of  our  Deacons,  Mr  C. 
Bmi^man\.  To  whom  about  eleven  yeares  synce,  the  Magistrates 
of  Narden  did  once  (and  not  weekly,  as  this  man  intimateth)  send 
a  little  money  to  be  given  to  the  poore  of  the  Church :  which  he 
together  with  one  of  the  Elders  {Mr.  G.  Knifton)  did  accordingly 
bestow  vpon  such  as  they  iudged  to  stand  most  in  need 

In  the  same  work  Johnson  gives  the  following  interesting 
description  of  the  troubles  of  the  congregation  in  the  Low 
Countries,  while  he  and  some  of  the  other  officers  and  members 
were  in  prison  at  London^ : — 

I.  About  thirteen  yeares  synce  [1593  X],  this  Church  through 
persecution  in  England,  was  driven  to  come  into  these  countreyes. 
A  while  after  they  were  come  hither  [1594  ?],  divers  of  them  [at 
Campen  ?]  fell  into  the  heresies  of  the  Anabaptists  (which  are  too 
common  in  these  countreys)  and  so  persisting  were  excommunicated 
by  the  rest.  Then  a  while  after  that  [1595  or  1596  ?]  againe,  many 
others  [at  Naarden  ?]  (of  whom  I  think  he  speaketh  here)  some 
elder  some  younger,  even  too  many,  though  not  the  half  (as  I 
vnderstand)  fell  into  a  schisuie  from  the  rest,  and  so  many  of  them 
as  continewed  therein  were  cast  out :  divers  other  of  them  repent- 
ing and  returning  before  excomunication,  &  divers  of  them 
after. . . . 

For  the  excommunication  in  generall,  it  was  in  deed  recalled : 
wherevpon  C.  S.  [Christopher  Symkins  ?],  one  of  the  schismed  here 
mentioned  by  him,  wrote  vnto  me  thereabout.  (And  here  the 
Reader  is  to  know  that  my  self  with  some  others  of  vs,  both  of 
the  officers  and  other  brethren,  were  then  prisoners  at  London, 
while  these  things  fell  out  in  the  Church  being  in  the  Low 
countreyes^.) 

Francis  Johnson,  George  Johnson,  and  Daniel  Studley 
probably  reached  Holland  late  in  September,  or  early  in 
October,  1597'.  Whether  the  congregation  had  settled  in 
Amsterdam  before  that  time  is  uncertain,  but  within  two  weeks 

1  In  H.[enoch]  Cl.[apham]'s  "A  Chronological  Discourse",  London, 
1609  [p.  3]. 

2  In  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas  White",  1606,  p.  46. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  63.  *  Ibid.,  p.  64. 

^  See  George  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  1603,  pp.  112-13,  and  E.  Arber's 
"Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  1897,  p.  107. 


The  Barroivists  on  the  Continent  157 

after  Johnson's  arrival  it  must  have  moved  thither,  if  indeed  it 

had  not  done  so  before,  for  then  "a  great  house /and  having 

sundry  romes  to  spare  "  was  hired  in  Amsterdam  for  the  use  of 

the  church  ^ 

Henoch  Clapham  gives  still  further  information  concerning 

the  congregation  at  Campen  and  Naarden,  namely  that  they 

"  were  contented  "  while  in  these  towns  "  to  dwell  in  Monasteries, 

and  so  did  "I     From  Clapham  it  also  appears  that  the  first 

Barrowists  did  not  sing  psalms,  but  that  when  Johnson  became 

pastor  he  persuaded  his  followers  not  to  neglect  singing"* : — 

Franc.  Johnson  (being  aduised  by  one  [Henoch  Clapham  ^  that 
talked  with  him  thereabouts  in  the  Clincke  at  London)  did  presse 
the  vse  of  our^  singing  Psalmes  (neglected  before  of  his  people  for 
Apochrypha;)  wherevpon  his  Congregation  publikely  in  their  meet- 
inges  vsed  them,  till  they  could  haue  them  translated  into  verse,  by 
some  of  their  Teachers :  Which  barbarous  successe,  I  am  not 
ignoraunt  [of].  M.  Tho.  Settle  in  Norffoike,  can  with  me  witnesse 
this,  so  well  as  some  resident  now  in  London. 

Clapham  also  furnishes  us  with  other  particulars  relating  to 
the  Barrowists  in  London  when  Francis  Johnson  came  to  confer 
with  Barrowe  in  the  Clink,  and  afterwards.  He  tells  us  that 
Johnson  and  Greenwood  were  made  respectively  Pastor  and 
Teacher,  or  Doctor,  "  without  any  Imposition  of  hands ",  but 
that  when  Johnson  came  to  Amsterdam  five  or  six  years  later, 
he  had  a  ceremony  of  imposition  of  hands  performed  over  him 
by  the  lay  members  of  his  own  congregation ^ 

The  manner  of  taking  the  collection  at  the  Barrowist 
meetings  in  London,  and  later  in  Holland,  is  thus  amusingly 
told  by  Clapham*: — 

And  hereupon  it  was,  that  the  Separists  did  at  first  in  their  secret 

1  George  Johnson's  "A  discom-se",  p.  113. 

2  Henoch  Clapham's  "  A  Chronological  Discourse",  1609  [p.  3]. 

3  Ibid.  [p.  36]. 

*  Notice  that  Clapham  seems  to  consider  himself  among  those  interested 
in  the  matter.  He  may  have  been  imprisoned  with  the  Barrowists  and 
indeed  may  have  participated  in  their  meetings.  He  does  not  include 
himself  among  Johnson's  "  people  ",  however,  though  for  a  time  the  Bar- 
rowists may  have  believed  him  to  be  thoroughly  in  sympathy  with  them. 

s  Henoch  Clapham'.s  "A  Chronological  Discourse"  [p.  31]. 

6  Ibid.  [p.  vi]. 


158  Early  English  Dissetiters 

Conuenticles,  appoy^it  their  Deacons  to  stand  at  the  Chamber  dore,  at 
the  peoples  out-gate,  with  their  Hats  in  hand  {much  like  after  the 
fashion  of  a  Play-house)  into  the  which  they  put  their  voluntary. 
But  coynming  beyonde  seas,  where  a  man  might  haue  seauen  Doyts 
for  a  penny,  it  fell  out,  howsoeuer  their  voluntary  {at  the  casting  in) 
did  make  a  great  clangor,  the  Summa  totalis  ouerseene,  the  m-aisters 
of  the  Play,  came  to  haue  but  a  few  pence  to  their  share.  Whereupon, 
a  broad  Dish  {reasonable  flat)  was  placed  in  the  middest  of  their 
conuentio7i,  that  whe7i  the  voluntarie  was  cast  in,  others  might  obserue 
the  quantitie.  But  this  way  serued  not  the  turne,  for  a  few  doyts 
rushing  in  vpon  the  soddaine,  could  not  easily  be  obserued,  of  ^vhat 
quantity  it  might  be.  Vpon  this,  the  Pastor  gaue  out,  that  if  {besides 
giftes  from  others  abroad)  they  ivould  not  make  him  Tenne  pounds 
yearely  at  least,  he  would  leaue  them,,  as  vmvorthy  the  Gospell.  They 
stickle,  for  feare  of  a  fall ;  and  [William]  Holder  [Houlder]  the 
Glouer  must  giue  sixe  Styuers  a  weekefor  his  part :  George  Cl.[eaton] 
the  Bricklayer,  more  Styuers  fo?'  his  part,  by  reason  that  he  had  good 
doinges :  and  so  others  accordingly.  The  Glouer  complaines  of  the 
greatnesse  of  the  Cesse,  and  therefore  sayd ;  that  hee  would  for 
England,     &c 

Houlder  accordingly  became  a  "  wandering  starre." 
According  to  Clapham  the  Puritan  ministers  ridiculed  the 
style  of  preaching  adopted  by  the  early  Barrowists' : — 

A  third  cause  of  the  Miiiisters  conteinipt,  hath  arisen  froin  our 
Syncerians,  tvho  haue  made  it  a  very  small  matter,  to  preach  vpon  the 
Scriptures :  holding  euery  howers  talke,  A  Se?'mon :  Insormich  as,  a 
mimber  ivould  not  goe  to  meate  {if  afeiv  were  present  of  their  faction) 
but  there  must  be  a  kind  of  Sermon. 

Maister  Barrowe  himselfe,  euen  to  my  selfe  {telling  him  that 
Maister  Penry  did  vse  that  fashion  of  Preaching,)  did  exceedi7igly 
dislike  it ;  saying  of  that,  and  of  some  Pin-sellers  and  Pedlers  that 
then  tvere  put  to  preach  in  their  Thursedayes  Prophecie,  that  it  would 
bring  the  Scrijytures  into  mightie  contempt. 

Before  1609  Francis  Johnson  seems  to  have  been  nicknamed 
the  "  Bishop  of  Brownisme  ",  because  "  he  exerciseth  authoritie 
ouer  some  [Barrowist]  assemblies  in  England  and  elsewhere  "^ 

The  internal  troubles  and  dissensions  in  Johnson's  con- 
gregation before  1603,  as  is  well  known,  are  most  vividly  told  by 
his  brother  George  in  a  work  printed  at  Amsterdam  in  that 
year,  and  entitled,  "A  discourse  of  some  troubles/  |  and  ex- 
communications in  the  banished  |  English  Church  at  Amsterdam.  I 
Published  for  sundry  causes  declared  in  the  preface   to  the 

'  Henoch  Clapham's  "A  Chronological  Discourse",  1609,  p.  vii. 
2  Ibid.  [p.  56]. 


The  Barrowists  on  the  Continent  159 

Pastour  I  of  the  sayd  Church.  |  ...  ",  1603.  The  only  copies  of 
this  work  known  to  me  at  present  are  those  in  Trinity  College 
Library,  Cambridge  ;  in  the  Chetham  Library,  Manchester;  and 
in  Sion  College  Library,  London ;  but  Archbishop  Bancroft  also 
had  a  copy  in  his  own  library,  which  unless  it  has  been  lost, 
should  some  day  be  found  in  Lambeth  Palace  Library.  The  text 
of  the  work  breaks  off  abruptly  at  page  214,  and  we  learn  from 
Francis  Johnson's  "AN  INQVIRIE  |  AND  ANSWER  |  Of 
Thomas  White  ",  published  in  1606,  that  this  publication  of  his 
brother's  was  "  but  part  of  a  book,  printed  before  the  rest  was 
finished  "\  so  that  probably  not  more  than  214  pages  were  ever 
issued. 

From  this  work  by  George  Johnson  we  learn  among  other 
things  that  Henry  Barrowe  left  a  sum  of  money  to  Francis 
Johnson's  congregation  "  for  a  stock  ",  i.e.,  a  trust  fund,  and  that 
before  1598-9  "monie"  had  been  "sent  from  [the  Barrowist 
church  in?]  London,  [Harrison's  congregation  in?j  Middelburgh, 
and  [Peter  Fairlambe  and  his  supporters  in  ?]  Barbarie  for  the 
poore"  of  the  congregation  at  Amsterdam  ^  It  also  appears 
that  while  the  Barrowists  were  at  Campen  and  Naarden  before 
Johnson's  arrival,  an  attempt  had  been  made  to  provide  certain 
officers  for  the  church.  One  Mr  Smith  [William  Smythe  ?] 
seems  to  have  been  their  "teacher"  for  a  time^  and  Mr 
[Matthew]  Slade  was  chosen  an  elder  in  addition  to  Daniel 
Studley  and  George  Knifton.  There  was  but  one  deacon, 
Christopher  Bowman.  After  Johnson  reached  Amsterdam  still 
further  changes  among  the  church  officers  were  apparently 
made.  Not  until  then,  it  seems  therefore,  could  Henry 
Ainsworth  have  been  elected  "  teacher  ",  and  very  likely  he  was 
not  chosen  until  somewhat  later. 


1  P.  61.  2  "  A  discourse  ",  p.  60. 

3  P.  214.  See,  however,  a  passage  in  H.  A.[insworth]'s  "Covnter- 
poyson  ",  1608,  p.  41,  which  seems  to  be  contrary  to  this  view :  "Mr.  Smith, 
Crud,  and  some  others,  (which  never  were  officers,  much  lesse  pillars,  in 
our  church,)  did  indeed  forsake  their  first  faith,  and  died  soon  after  ;..." 
Whereby  1  think  he  must  mean,  in  the  face  of  George  Johnson's  testimony, 
that  Mr  Smith  was  never  an  officer,  i.e.,  "  teacher ",  of  the  congregation 
after  Ainsworth  became  the  colleague  of  Francis  Johnson. 


160  Early  English  Dissenters 

George  Johnson's  book  is  valuable  not  only  because  of  its 
scarcity,  but  also  because  of  the  many  important  details  it 
contains.  Nevertheless,  the  work  does  not  make  us  admire  its 
author,  for  in  it  he  not  only  seeks  to  malign  his  brother  by 
publishing  to  the  world  an  account  of  the  unhappy  differences 
in  his  congregation,  but  also,  as  will  soon  be  seen,  reveals 
himself  as  a  person  of  such  narrow  views  as  to  repel  the  modern 
reader. 

About  1594  Francis  Johnson,  who  was  then  in  the  Clink 
prison,  became  a  suitor  to  Mrs  Tomison  Boys  [Boyes],  a  widow. 
At  once  objections  were  made  by  George  Johnson  and  others 
interested,  who  said  that  she  "  was  not  a  fitt  match  for  him  ". 
Notwithstanding  this  opposition  we  are  told  that  "  Shortly 
after  they  preceded  in  marriage  secretly".  Immediately  an 
unceasing  uproar  arose  in  the  congregation  concerning  the 
unsuitable  elegance  of  Mrs  Johnson's  apparel,  etc.  Was  ever 
the  Puritan  spirit  more  quaintly  manifested  than  in  the  follow- 
ing passage  written  by  George  Johnson,  Schoolmaster ! 

These  things  following  were  reproved  in  Mris  Tomison  lohnson 
the  Pastors  wife  touching  apparel,... 

First  the  wearing  of  a  long  busk  after  the  fashion  of  the  world 
contrary  to  Rom.  12.  2,  I.  Tim.  2.  9.  10.  2.  Wearing  of  the  long 
white  brest  after  the  fashion  of  yong  dames,  and  so  low  she  wore  it, 
as  the  world  call  them  kodpeece  brests.  Contrary  to  the  former 
places,  and  also  to  I.  Pet.  3.  3[.]  4.  5.  3.  Whalebones  in  the 
bodies  of  peticotes  Contrary  to  the  former  rules,  as  also  against 
nature,  being  as  the  Phisitians  affirme  hinderers  of  conceiving  or 
procreating  children.     4.     Great  sleeves  sett  out  with  whalebones, 

which   the  world  cal Contrary  to  the  former  rules  of  modesty, 

and  shamefastnes.  5.  Excesse  of  lace  vpon  them  after  the  fashion 
of  yong  Marchants  wives.  Contrary  to  the  rules  of  modesty. 
6.  Foure  or  five  gould  Rings  on  at  once.  Contrary  to  the  former 
rules  in  a  Pastors  wife.  7  A  copple  crowned  hatt  with  a  twined 
band,  as  yong  Marchants  wives,  and  yong  Dames  vse.  Immodest 
and  toyish  in  a  Pastors  wife.  Contrary  also  to  the  former  rules. 
8  Tucked  aprons,  like  round  hose :  contrary  likewise  to  the  former 
rules.  9.  Excesse  in  rufs,  laune  coives,  muske,  and  such  like 
things:  contrary  to  I.  Tim.  2.  9,  I.  Peter.  3.  3,  forbidding  costly 
apparel.  10  The  painted  Hipocritical  brest,  shewing  as  if  there 
were  some  special  workes,  and  in  ti'uth  nothing  but  a  shadow. 
Contrary  to  modesty,  and  sobriety.  11.  Bodies  tied  to  the  peti- 
cote  with  points,  as  men  do  their  dublets  to  their  hose.  Contrary 
to  I.  Thes.  5.  22.  conferred  with  Deut.  22,  I.  lohn  2.  16.  12.     Some 


The  Barrowists  on  the  Continent  161 

also  reporte  that  she  laid  forth  her  hears  [hair  ?]  also  Contrary  to 
I.  Tim.  2.  9,  I  Pet  3.  3.... 

Touching  her  actions  and  dealings  giving  offence,  whereof  she 
was  likewise  admonished,  they  were  as  follow 

First  she  stoode  gazing,  bracing  or  vaunting  in  shop  doores. 
Contrary  to  the  rules  of  modest  behaviour  in  the  daughters  of  Zion, 
and  condemned.  Isah.  3.  16,  2  She  so  quaffed  wine,  that  a  papist 
in  their  company  said  to  another  woman  .•  You  leave  some,  and 
shew  modesty,  but  Mris,  lohnson,  shee  etc.  she  doth  not.  This 
behaviour  condemned  I.  Thess.  4.  12.  and  in  the  places  named 
before.  3.  She  laide  in  bedd  on  the  Lordes  day  till  9  a  clock,  and 
hindered  the  exercise  of  the  worde,  she  being  not  sick,  nor  having 
any  iust  cause  to  lie  so  long  :  This  contrary  to  the  diligent  care, 
and  redines,  which  should  be  in  Gods  servants  Psal.  119.  Isah, 
58.  13  Ezec.  20.  12.  Act.  20.  7.  &c.  4.  Her  behaviour  in  all 
stoutnes,  and  (as  some  said)  disdaine:  she  also  (as  some  compleined) 
did  not  willingly  visit  the  poore.  This  is  contrary  to  humility,  and 
love... ' 

On  the  whole  Francis  Johnson  seems  to  have  had  as 
difficult  a  life  as  any  separatist  leader,  but  he  could  not  be 
entirely  overthrown  in  spite  of  the  carping  criticism  of  his 
enemies.  One  would  think  that  he  might  have  felt  it  his  duty 
to  have  answered  his  younger  brother's  book,  but  he  remained 
silent,  though  three  years  later,  when  he  prepared  his  work 
against  Thomas  White,  who  also  had  dealt  none  too  kindly  with 
him,  he  wrote  in  this  calm,  dignified  style  of  the  fanatic,  narrow- 
minded,  brother  whose  excommunication  we  cannot  feel  was 
entirely  unmerited : — 

As  for  that  he  saith  of  the  book  aforesaid  [".4  Discourse  of 
certaine  trotibles  &  excom.  «&c."]  lying  vnanswered,  we  have  divers 
reasons  for  so  leaving  it.  1.  It  is  but  part  of  a  book,  printed 
before  the  rest  was  finished  :  And  to  see  the  whole,  might  be  of 
speciall  vse  if  an  answer  should  be  given  vnto  it.  2.  Synce  the 
writing  thereof,  it  pleased  God  to  visite  him  with  sicknes  that  he 
died  :  And  seing  he  is  dead,  we  do  so  leave  him  .•  forbearing  now  to 
write  what  we  could.  3.  He  did  not,  like  as  this  man,  leave  or 
contrary  our  generall  cause  and  testimony  against  the  Church  of 
England  :  but  held  it  so  himself,  as  of  late  going  into  England 
he  was  there  taken  and  put  in  prison  for  this  cause,  where  he  died 
vnder  their  hands..." 

The  pathetic  end  of  George  Johnson's  life  is  described  as 

1  "  A  discourse  of  some  troubles  ",  1603,  pp    135-37. 

2  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas  White",  1606,  p.  61. 

B.  11 


162  Early  English  Dissenters 

follows   in   Richard   Clyfton's   "  AN  |  ADVERTISE- MENT  j 

...",  1612:— 

The  one  was  George  lohnsoii  the  Pastoui's  brother,  who  dyed 
at  Durham  :  the  manner  of  whose  sicknes  and  death  was  signified 
hither  to  his  brother  by  writing  from  thence,  by  a  friend  of  his 
that  was  often  with  him,  both  before  &  in  the  time  of  his  sicknes : 
Who  wrote  hither,  that  he  being  in  prison,  bestowed  the  most  of 
his  time,  in  finishing  the  book  which  before  he  had  begunne,  and 
whereof  some  sheets  are  printed ;  which  when  he  had  done,  it 
pleased  God  to  visite  him  with  sicknes  unto  death.  At  which 
time  on  his  death  bedde,  he  gave  out  (as  he  wi-ote,  &  is  well 
known)  verie  heavie  &  great  exclamations  about  his  sinnes  by  the 
Lord  layd  to  his  charge,  calling  unto  God  for  mercie.  And  in  this 
sort  (sayth  the  Gentleman  that  writ  the  letter,  &  was  present 
there)  he  continued  by  the  space  of  an  houre  that  I  was  with  him, 
shewing  great  trouble  in  minde,  yet  not  without  comfort  in  the  Lord, 
whose  servant  I  doubt  not  but  he  dyed...^ 

With  the  death  of  George  Johnson  the  troubles  of  the 
Barrowists  temporarily  subsided,  though  soon  to  recommence. 
Of  those  which  occurred  during  Francis  Johnson's  lifetime  we 
shall  make  little  mention,  as  they  have  been  treated  at  sufficient 
length,  though  the  writer  believes  somewhat  unfairly  and  rather 
too  sensationally,  in  Mr  Arber's  "  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers". 
Points  that  have  been  less  emphasized  may  more  profitably 
occupy  our  time. 

We  may  begin  with  the  life  of  Henry  Ainsworth,  who, 
according  to  the  brief  but  instructive  monograph  of  Messrs  Wm 
E.  A.,  and  Ernest,  Axon-,  was  born  in  Norfolk,  not  in  Lancashire, 
as  has  sometimes  been  supposed.  "  He  was  a  native  of  Swanton 
Morley",  it  seems,  "where  he  was  born  in  1570.  His  father, 
Thomas  Aynsworth,  was  a  yeoman.  After  being  three  years 
under  the  scholastic  care  of  Mr  Clephamson,  he  proceeded  to 
St  John's  College,  Cambridge,  but  a  year  later  transferred 
himself  to  Gonville  and  Caius  College.  Here  he  was  admitted 
at  the  close  of  1587,  and  remained  three  years  "as  a  scholar  on 
the  foundation  ".     It  is  not  stated  that  he  received  a  degreed 

1  P.  14. 

2  "  Henry  Ainsworth,  the  Puritan  Commentator... (Reprinted  from  the 
'Transactions  of  the  Lancashire  and  Cheshire  Antiquarian  Society', 
1888.)",  Manchester,  1889,  8«. 

3  Pp.  44-5. 


The  Barroivists  on  the  Continent  163 

Before  1598  Ainsworth  seems  to  have  been  in  Holland  S 
though  it  is  not  manifest  how  much  earlier  he  arrived.  He  is 
said  at  first  to  have  "  entered  into  the  service  of  a  bookseller  at 
Amsterdam  as  a  porter  "^  and  it  has  usually  been  claimed  by 
modern  historians  that  he  was  the  author,  wholly  or  in  part,  of 
"  A  Trve  Confession  "  published  by  Johnson's  congregation  in 
1596.  As  yet  I  know  of  no  trustworthy  evidence  for  this 
assertion.  He  is  said,  further,  to  have  been  very  poor  at  this 
early  period  of  his  residence  in  Holland.  Already  he  must  have 
had  an  unusual  knowledge  of  Hebrew.  It  is  my  opinion  that 
Ainsworth  did  not  become  "  teacher  "  of  the  Barrowist  congrega- 
tion in  Amsterdam  until  Francis  Johnson's  arrival  in  the 
autumn  of  1597,  and  possibly  not  until  a  little  later.  Before 
that  time  in  Johnson's  absence,  as  has  already  been  stated,  one 
Mr  Smith  [William  Smythe  ?]  had  probably  held  that  position, 
and  accordingly,  if  any  one  beside  Johnson  and  the  elders 
assisted  in  producing  the  Confession  of  1596,  Smith,  and  not 
Ainsworth,  would  naturally  have  been  that  one. 

During  his  lifetime  Ainsworth  published  a  considerable 
number  of  books,  but  these  contain  almost  nothing  relating  to 
his  personal  history,  and  therefore  little  is  now  known  of  his  life 
except  what  appears  in  a  few  scattered  references  in  the  works 
of  other  writers.  These  references,  however,  are  worth  citing. 
In  the  first  place,  there  are  the  following  interesting,  but  too 
little  noticed  and  appreciated,  points  relating  to  his  early  life 
given  in  John  Paget's  "AN  \  ARROW  |  Against  the  Separa- 
tion I  OF  THE  I  Brownists...",  Amsterdam,  1618.  Says 
Paget  ^ : — 

1  John  Paget's  "An  Arrow",  1618  (not  1617  as  given  by  Dr  Powicke) 
p.  119, — "How  comes  it  that  you  who  have  lived  more  than  20.  yeares  as 
a  neighbour  vnto  the  Reformed  Chui'ches  in  these  countries  should  be 
such  a  stranger  vnto  them  and  so  ignorant  of  their  estate  and  practise  ? " 
This  citation  indicates  that  Ainsworth  was  in  Holland  in  or  before  1598, 
but,  in  the  presence  of  other  evidence,  it  cannot  be  used  to  prove  more 
than  that. 

2  "  Henry  Ainsworth  ",  as  above,  p.  45. 

3  Pp.  91-2.  I  know  of  no  good  reason  why  the  statements  made  in 
this  citation  cannot  be  considered  as  trustworthy.  If  they  were  not  true, 
they  are  of  such  a  nature,  that  they  would  certainly  have  been  denied. 

11—2 


164  Early  English  Dissenters 

Now  you  being  such  an  Apostata  [Apostate]  as  according  to 
your  present  profession  have  sundry  times  turned  back  vnto  the 
Idolatrous  false  Church,  as  hath  bene  by  divers  persons  witnessed, 
neither  could  Mi\  lohnson  deny  the  same,  when  he  ["Inqvir.  of 
Th.  wh.(ite)  p.  41.  42."]  was  most  desirous  to  excuse  you  therein; 
though  it  was  obiected  that  you  had  turned  your  coate  as  oft  if  not 
oftner  then  D.  Perne:...Let  it  be  well  observed  that  you  are  thus 
noted  to  have  turned  your  coate  k  changed  your  religion  jive  severall 
times,  namely,  first  being  of  our  religion  and  a  member  of  the 
church  of  England  you  forsook  that  Church  and  separated :  Secondly^ 
that  being  separated,  you  did  againe  in  London  being  in  the  hands 
of  authoritie  yeeld  to  joyne  with  the  worship  and  ministery  of  the 
Church  of  England  :  Thirdly,  that  after  this  you  did  againe  slide 
back  vnto  the  separation  and  renounce  the  Church  of  England : 
Fourthly,  that  after  this  when  you  were  in  Ireland^  and  in  some 
danger  of  punishment  for  your  scandal,  you  did  againe  returne  vnto 
the  communion  renounced  by  you,  whether  fainedly  or  vnfainedly, 
I  leave  vnto  your  self  to  consider:  Fiftly,  after  this  you  change 
your  profession  againe  and  fall  back  vnto  separation,  and  stick  now 
presently  in  this  Schisme  :... 

Then  there  is  the  true  story  of  Ainsworth's  death,  a  citation 
concerning  which  fi-om  the  earliest  published  source  is,  I  think, 
here  given  for  the  first  time.  This  account,  it  will  be  noticed,  is 
quite  in  conflict  with  tradition-,  and  yet  it  is  hardly  surprising 

Paget  in  a  case  of  this  kind  may  have  made  mistakes  as  other  men,  but, 
though  a  busybody,  he  certainly  did  not  pm-posely  tell  untruths. 

1  This  statement  that  Ainsworth  went  as  a  Brownist  to  Ireland  is 
suggestive,  for  in  the  next  chapter  we  shall  see  that  in  1594  there  were 
Brownists  in  Ireland.  Ainsworth  probably  was  one  of  these,  and  Governor 
Bradford  in  "A  Dialogue"  (See  A.  Young's  "Chronicles",  1841)  says  that 
Ainsworth  came  to  Holland  from  Ireland. 

2  The  earliest  version  of  the  traditional,  apocryphal  accounts  of  Ains- 
worth's death  that  I  remember  to  have  seen,  is  the  following,  taken  from 
an  undated  eighteenth  century  document  (Rawlinson  MS.  B.  158,  pp.  141-2) 
in  the  Bodleian  Library  : 

"Hen  :  Ainsworth  was  a  great  Separatist  (a  Brownist  I  think)  and  Lived  at 
Amsterdame  where  he  had  a  congregation,  one  euening  goeing  along  the 
streete  he  stumbled,  upon  a  pur.se  which  taking  up  he  found  full  of  gold, 
with  a  small  bunch  of  keies  hanging  at  it.  He  Carried  it  home ;  and  the 
next  day  sent  about  the  crier  to  know  who  had  lost  a  purse,  about  such  a 
time,  ncer  such  a  place,  with  Money  in  it ;  hereupon  the  purse  &c :  was 
chalenged  by  a  lewish  woman,  who  came  to  him  told  the  just  quantity  of 
the  money  In  it  caried  him  to  her  house,  and  shewed  him  the  boxes  [?]  to 
which  those  keies  belonged  in  fine, — convinced  him  that  it  was  her  purse 


The  Barrowists  07i  the  Continent  165 

that  the  facts  have  not  been  familiar  even  to  one  so  learned  as 
the  editor  of  the  "British  Weekly "\  for  there  is  apparently  only 
one  copy  extant  of  the  work  in  which  this  particular  information 
is  to  be  found.  This  copy  is  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  and  is 
entitled,  "CERTAIN  NOTES  |  0/  |  M.  HENRY  AYNS- 
WORTH  I  HIS  LAST  SERMON.  |  Taken  by  pen  in  the  pub- 
lique  delivery  by  one  of  ^  kis  flock,  a  little  before  his  death.  \  Amio 
1622.  I  ...  I  Lnprinted  1630",  8°.  The  book  was  published  by 
Sabine  Staresmore,  who  briefly  tells  the  story  of  Ainsworth's 
death  by  "  that  sore  perplexing  and  tedious  disease  of  the 
stone  ".  The  passage  is  so  little  known  that  it  may  be  cited 
in  full-:— 

They  were  the  instructions  our  late  faithfull  Teacher  M.  Ayns- 
ivorfh,  delivered  to  us  all,  the  last  time  he  ever  executed  his  ministery 
tvith  us,  lohich  tvas  at  such  a  time  as  his  hodye  &  naturall  strength 
were  so  decayed,  that  he  wanted  (as  ye  know)  ability  to  come  up  again, 
even  that  very  Lords  day  in  the  afternoone  as  his  usttall  manner  was, 
wherein  his  faithfullnes  may  he  seen  even  to  his  last  gasp,  in  striving 
to  feed  thejlocke  even  when  the  hand  of  God  was  heavy  upon  him  in 
that  sore  perjjlexing  and  tedious  disease  of  the  stone,  of  which  in  a  few 
dayes  after  he  dyed,  yet  since  even  in  his  strong  jjaines  {that  sometime 
by  reason  of  the  extremity  caused  a  stay  of  speach,  to  the  grief e  of  the 
hearers  and  beholders)  he  was  delivered  of  this,  as  the  last  fruit  of  his 
ministry, . . . 

A  fuller  and  later  medical  report  of  Dr  Nicolaus  Tulpius  on 
Ainsworth's  case  is  cited  in  the  previously  mentioned  pamphlet 
of  Messrs  Wm  E.  A.,  and  Ernest,  Axon  (pp.  54-5)^ 

and  Money,  and  so  he  gave  it  her  ;  shortly  after  the  woman  brought  her 
husband  to  him,  who  from  talking  of  the  purse  &c:  began  to  discoui"se  of 
their  Religion:  &c:  Ainsworth  prevailed  so  upon  him,  that  the  lew  had 
nothing  more  to  say  In  defence  of  his  party ;  onely  he  asked  Liberty  to 
bring  a  Couple  of  their  Rabbles  to  Argue  with  him ;  which  they  did,  aiul 
Ainsworth  is  said  to  haue  pleaded  his  cause  so  well  with  them  both  out  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  their  own  Authors  that  they  had  nothing  to  say,  but 
within  three  days  Ainsworth  was  found  poisoned." 

1  Who  several  years  ago,  according  to  the  author's  recollection,  in 
reviewing  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Shakespeare's  "Baptist  and  Congregational 
Pioneers  ",  plainly  manifested  that  he  did  not  know  how  Ainsworth  died. 

2  Pp.  x-xi. 

3  The  first  edition  of  the  "  Observationes  Medic* "  of  Dr  Nicolaus 
Tulpius  of  Amsterdam  was  published  in  that  city  in  1641.  What  seems 
to  be  a  second  enlarged  and  improved^  edition,  called  "editio  nova",  was 


166  Early  English  Dissenters 

With  these  facts  of  Ainsworth's  life  before  us  we  may  now 
briefly  consider  the  rise  of  the  Ainsworthians,  or  followers  of 

issued  in  octavo  at  Amsterdam  in  1652.  A  copy  of  this  edition  is  in  the 
Bodleian  Library  and  gives  (pp.  173-5)  the  following  description  of  the 
disease  from  which  Ainsworth  died  : — 

"  Ischuria  lunatica. 
"  TT Enrico  Ainsvvordo,  Theologo  Britanno,  supprimebatur  urina,  quoli- 
J-  -L  bet  iermb  plenilunio  :  cum  insigni  angustifi,  &  evident!  totius 
corporis  incendio.  Neque  excernebatur  ilia  iteriim  ;  nisi  vel  declinante 
lunS, ;  vel  exsolutS,  brachii  venL  Veriim  sanguinem  toties  mittere, 
quotiens  Luna  orbem  suum  complens,  supprimeret  ipsi  lotium :  non 
videbatur  h  re  segri.  Qui  propterea  aliquotiens,  tulit  patienter,  quod 
nequiit  altrinsecus  evitari,  malum. 

"  Cujus  rarus,  &  inusitatus  rumor,  ut  excivit  varia,  ciim  nostratium, 
turn  Britannorum  Medicorum  ingenia :  invenit  tamen  neminem  tarn 
sagaci  judicio  :  ut  potuerit  reddere  genuinam,  reciprocantis  hujus  jieriodi, 
rationem  :  nedum  subiti,  illius  auxilii  ;  quod  teger  dictum,  ac  factum 
percepit,  h  sanguine  ex  brachio  misso. 

"  Sola  anatome,  post  obitum  instituta,  eruit  illic  feliciter  veritatem  in 
profundum  demersam :  &  ostendit  distinct^,  qui  angusta,  renis  sinistri, 
pelvis,  excrevisset  in  eam  amplitudinem,  ut  suppleret  commodfe  vicem, 
vesicae  urinariae.     Quae  propterek  tam  fuit  vacua,  qukm  ren  repletus. 

"Qua)  collectio  urinse,  majoribus  venis  adeo  vicina,  procul  dubio,  in 
causa  fuit,  quod  tam  prompts  fluxerit  ipsi  lotium,  simulac  feriretur 
brachii  vena.  Nam  velut  oenopolae,  spiritu  supra  priiis  emisso,  facilfe 
vinum  infra  eliciunt,  ex  repletis  doliis :  sic  reserantur  quoque  renes,  ubi 
vel  minimum,  spirituosi  sanguinis  adimitur  tumidis  brachii  venis.  Ex 
quai'um  incisione,  vident  propterea  peritiores  Medici,  non  tam  sisti,  qukm 
promoveri  saepfe  mulieribus,  suppressa  menstrua. 

"Sed  quid  dicendum,  de  lunae  consensu?  quae  uti  reliquis  dominatur 
aquis :  sic  videtur  quoque  vim  suam  exseruisse,  in  lotium  hujus  venera- 
bilis  Theologi.  Cujus  urinam,  in  rene  detentam,  suppressit  intumescens 
hoc  sidus,  longfe  faciliiis  ;  &  dispersit  suppressam  fort5  multo  celeriiis,  per 
vicinas  venas  ;  quam  si  delituisset  in  remotioi-is  vesicae,  receptaculo. 

"A  qua  periodic^,  reciprocantis  urinae,  revolutione,  credibile  utique  est, 
provenisse,  quas  singulis  pleniluniis,  patiebatur,  ciim  febres,  tum  augus- 
tias.  Quibus  cum  plerumque  conflictabat,  ad  diem  quintum;  antequam 
ex  toto  liberaretur.  Sed  sanguine,  ex  brachio,  emisso,  resolvebatur  ilicd 
fraenum,  lotium  supj^rimens.  Quantumvis  vesica  praeter  hoc  impedi- 
mentum,  in  se  praeterea  contineret,  duos  insignes  calculos.  Uti  quoque 
foUiculus  fellis,  sed  parvos,  nigros,  teretes,  &,  instar  pumicis,  raros. 

"  Quantum  ver6  huic  Theologo  profuit,  sanguis  ex  brachio  detractus, 
tantum  juvere  alios,  in  simili,  urinae,  suppressione,  vel  sanguis  ubertim  fe 
naribus  profluens ;  vel  frequens  macularum,  in  habitu  corpoi-is,  eruptio. 


The  BarrowUts  on  the  Conthunt  167 

Henry  Ainsworth.  Up  to  1610,  though  there  always  was  more 
or  less  friction  in  Francis  Johnson's  church,  the  leaders  seem  to 
have  been  peaceably  disposed  toward  one  another.  There  had, 
however,  been  defections,  and  their  enemies  had  been  watchful. 
Nevertheless,  Johnson  appears  to  have  silenced  their  critics  by 
his  previously  mentioned  "AN  INQVIRIE  !  AND  ANSWER  [ 
Of  Thomas  White  |  ...  ",  published  in  1606,  so  that  for  several 
years  no  slanderous  works  against  his  congregation  were  printed. 
This  silence,  however,  seems  to  have  been  only  a  lull  before  the 
storm,  which  began  to  break  in  1609  and  1610,  and  which 
finally  resulted  in  a  permanent  division  between  the  followers 
of  Johnson  and  the  supporters  of  Ainsworth.  The  decision  to 
separate  was  made  by  the  Ainsworthians  on  December  15, 1610, 
and  carried  into  effect  on  the  following  day',  after  a  whole  year 
of  oral  and  written  discussion  between  the  parties,  in  which  each 
side  claimed  that  the  other  was  at  fault-. 

The  trouble  between  Johnson  and  Ainsworth  may  have 
been  first  brought  about  by  those  who  had  circulated  scandalous 
stories  against  some  of  the  congregation.  Johnson  probably 
felt  that  malice  was  the  cause  of  much  that  had  been  said,  that 
it  was  unadvisable  at  any  time  to  bring  such  matters  before  the 
whole  church,  and  that  he  did  not  wish  to  trust  to  a  popular 
vote,  because  he  was  not  entirely  convinced  that  the  people  with 
whom  he  had  to  deal  would  render  a  really  just  decision.  This 
led  him  to  maintain  that  not  the  whole  congregation,  but  the 
elders  only,  were  the  church, — a  conclusion  which  Ainsworth 
naturally  claimed  was  quite  at  variance  with  the  principles  on 
which  the  church  had  been  founded.  A  relic  of  this  discussion 
is  probably  to  be  found  in  an  extended  and  hitherto  unnoticed 
manuscript  of  Johnson's,  probably  preserved  by  Richard  Bancroft 
and  now  in  Lambeth  Palace  Library^.     It  has  no  title,  and  if  I 

Quibus  duobus  auxiliis  sanitatem  suam  aliquando  recuperavit,  luvenis 
quidam  ;  cui  integros  octodecim  dies  stagnaverat  urina." 
»  Richard  Clyfton's  "An  Advertisement",  1612,  p.  93. 

2  In  addition  to  the  preceding  reference  to  Clyfton's  "Advertisement", 
p.  93,  see  Henry  Ainsworth's  "  An  Animadversion  to  Mr  Richard  Clyftons 
Advertisement",  Amsterdam,  1G13,  pp.  123-36. 

3  MS.  445,  fol.  512  +  . 


168  Early  English  Dissenters 

remember    correctly,   is    anonymous,   but    it    is    undoubtedly 
Johnson's  work,  as  claimed  in  the  catalogue. 

The  number  of  those  who  seceded  with  Ainsworth  is  not 
stated,  but  it  looks  as  if  most  of  the  officers  as  well  as  many 
of  the  church  members  remained  with  Johnson.  Considerable 
reorganization  must  now  have  taken  place.  New  officers  had  to 
be  found  to  fill  the  positions  made  vacant  in  Johnson's  church, 
and  Ainsworth's  congregation  had  to  begin  an  independent 
existence.  For  two  or  three  years  both  parties  lingered  on  in 
Amsterdam.  At  first  Johnson  kept  possession  of  the  church 
building,  but  later  the  courts  decided  that  Ainsworth's  con- 
gregation was  the  church,  as  maintaining  its  earliest  traditions, 
and  gave  them  the  church  building.  After  this  Johnson's 
congregation  may  have  remained  in  Amsterdam  for  a  time, 
but  they  were  apparently  unpopular,  and  the  circulation  of 
pamphlets  full  of  scandalous  aspersions  probably  made  a  longer 
stay  impossible.  We  are  not,  therefore,  surprised  to  hear  of 
their  intention  to  leave  Amsterdam  for  Emden  in  May,  1612  or 
1613\ 

It  is  reported  in  "  The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists 
or  Separatists  ",  1612^  written  by  Christopher  Lawne,  and  three 
others,  that  only  one  elder  of  Johnson's  congregation,  Jean  de 
I'Ecluse,  formerly  a  printer  of  Rouen,  and  once  stated  to  be  "  a 
notable  drunkard  ",  "  went  with  M.  Ainsworth,  when  he  carried 
away  the  Church  fi:'om  the  Franciscans",  while  Jacob  Johnson, 
who  had  been  exiled  in  1599,  evidently  took  de  I'Ecl use's  place 
in  Johnson's  church.  It  is  also  said  that  the  Franciscans  sought 
to  banish  the  Ainsworthians  from  Amsterdam,  and  that  the 
minds  of  some  of  the  old  members  had  been  so  unsettled  that 
they  were  uncertain  to  which  section  of  the  congregation  they 
should  turn.  This  feeling  shows  that  the  stories,  which  had 
been  printed  against  Johnson  and  the  elders,  even  if  true,  had 
not  entirely  shaken  the  church's  faith  in  their  former  leaders. 
How  many  elders  Ainsworth's  congregation  had,  is  uncertain. 
We  know,  however,  that  Giles  Thorpe  was  a  deacon  about  1612 

1  In  "A  Shield  of  Defence",  1612,  by  John  Fowler  and  two  others, 
p.  33. 

2  P.  109 


The  Barrowists  on  the  Continent  169 

or  1613,  and  that  by  1618  he  had  been  made  an  Elder  with 
de  I'Ecluse. 

A  mistake  made  by  Dr  Dexter  relating  to  the  Barrowist 
troubles  about  this  time  needs  to  be  corrected.  In  his  Biblio- 
graphy he  mentions  a  book  entitled  "  The  Hunting  of  the 
foxe.  part  I.",  which  he  says  was  published  by  Giles  Thorpe 
in  1616.  Mr  Edward  Arber  partially  follows  Dr  Dexter  in 
mentioning^  this  work  as  a  "  ?  Printed  "  book,  but  changes  the 
date  to  "about  1610",  and  speaks  of  the  work  as  an  "utterly 
lost "  book.  As  a  matter  of  fact  Thorpe  wrote  a  work  entitled, 
"The  Hunting  of  the  foxe.  part  I."  before  or  about  1612,  but 
that  it  was  never  printed  or  published  as  a  whole,  or  under  that 
title,  is  plainly  shown  by  the  following  passage  from  John 
Paget's  "  ARROW  ",  1618,  in  which  he  is  evidently  referring  to 
three  pamphlets  entitled  respectively  "  Brovvnisme  Tvmed  The 
In-side  out-ward",  London,  1613,  by  Christopher  Lawne ;  "The 
Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists ",  1612, 
prepared  by  Christopher  Lawne,  John  Fowler,  Clement  Sanders, 
and  Robert  Bulwarde;  and  especially  "A  Shield  of  Defence 
against  the  Arrowes  of  Schisme  ",  Amsterdam,  1612,  written  by 
John  Fowler,  Clement  Saunders,  and  Robert  Bulwarde^ : — 

you  [Ainsworth]  speak  of  disguised  pamphlets  that  are  come  out  of 
our  congregation :  but  the  bookes  which  you  seeme  to  ayme  at,  are 
such  as  for  the  matter  of  them  are  taken  out  of  your  oifensive 
company,  and  do  in  part  shew  the  disguised  practises  of  your 
separation  :  for  the  persons  that  published  them,  they  also  were 
such  as  came  out  of  your  company,  who  leaving  their  schisme,  which 
they  once  professed  with  you,  were  more  fit  to  vvitnesse  such  things 
as  they  had  heard  and  seene  among  you  :  for  the  helpers,  which 
they  had  herein,  they  had  (besides  others)  M'^.  Th.[orpe]  now  an 
Elder  of  your  congregation  also  (but  then  a  deacon)  out  of  whose 
writing  [From  margin  :  "The  Hunting  of  the  foxe.  part.  I."]  which 
he  communicated  with  them,  they  receyved  sundry  things  which 
they  published,  and  many  more  which  should  have  bene  published, 
had  not  their  book  bene  mispx'inted  contrary  to  their  mindes :  for 
the  maner  of  printing  and  publishing  one  of  those  bookes,  great 
injury  hath  bene  done  vnto  them,... 

After  the  separation  between  Johnson  and  Ainsworth    in 

1  "The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  1897,  p.  9. 

2  Pp.  333-34. 


170  Early  English  Dissenters 

1610  Richard  Clyffcon  became  teacher  in  Johnson's  congregation 
and  apparently  remained  in  that  position  until  Johnson's  death 
in  1617.  Johnson  seems  to  have  carried  out  his  purpose  to  go  to 
Emden,  and  probably  would  have  remained  there  until  the  end 
of  his  life,  but  one  of  the  elders,  Francis  Blackwell,  interested 
the  congregation  in  a  voyage  to  Virginia,  which  in  some  way 
miscarried  and  ruined  the  prospects  of  many  of  the  members. 
It  was  this  misfortune  perhaps  that  brought  Johnson  again  to 
Amsterdam  where  more  work  and  charity  might  possibly  be 
found.  At  any  rate,  Johnson  was  temporarily  in  Amsterdam  in 
1617^  when  he  died.  Evidently  no  union  could  be  effected 
between  him  and  the  Ainsworthians,  and  after  his  death  the 
congregation,  which  appears  to  have  been  composed  of  about 
1.50  members  started  on  their  fateful  voyage  to  Virginia. 

Thus  were  the  early  separatists  torn  and  rent  by  endless 
divisions.  Says  John  Paget  in  "  ^iV  |  ARROW  |  Against  the 
Separation  \  OF  THE  |  Brownists",  Amsterdam,  1618,  a  work 
which  is  principally  directed  against  Ainsworth  and  his  con- 
gregation ^  : — 

OF  those  that  separate  from  the  Church  of  God,  there  are  many 
sorts  :  Though  the  Brownists  assume  vnto  themselves  the 
title  of  Separation,  and  call  themselves  the  Churches  of  the  Separa- 
tion, yet  is  not  this  title  sufficient  to  distinguish  them ;  Separation 
being  common  to  so  many. 

Of  the  Brownists  also  there  are  sundry  sects :    Some  separate 

1  See  the  Epistle  "To  the  Christian  Reader"  of  Francis  Johnson's 
"A  Christian  Plea",  1617.  This  work  is  the  very  "death-bed  Recanta- 
tion" of  Johnson's  which  Mr  Arber  ("Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers", 
p.  129,  note)  says  it  "is  certainly  not".  The  writer  came  to  this  opinion 
independently  of  Dr  Powicke,  who  takes  the  same  view. 

2  [P.  iii.]  Heretofore  it  has  been  the  custom  both  of  Congregational 
and  Baptist  historians  to  give  too  little  credence  to  statements  made  by 
the  opponents  of  their  beliefs,  and  also  to  choose  from  these  statements 
those  which  pleased  their  fancy,  and  to  omit  others.  Paget  has  been 
dealt  with  in  this  way,  but  while  he  certainly  was  a  busy-body  and  a 
disagreeable  man,  I  find  no  evidence  that  he  was  really  bad,  or  even  that 
his  controversial  statements  as  a  whole  cannot  be  trusted  as  much  as 
those  of  persons  opposed  to  him.  From  the  enemies  of  the  early  separa- 
tists in  reality  may  be  gleaned  some  of  the  most  valuable  points  in  their 
history. 


The  Barrowists  on  the  Contiiient  171 

from  the  Church  of  England  for  corruptions ;  and  yet  confesse 
both  it  <k  Roome  also  to  be  a  true  Church,  as  the  followers 
of  Mr.  lohnson :  Some  renounce  the  Church  of  England  as  a 
false  Church  ;  and  yet  allow  private  communion  with  the  godly 
therein,  as  Mr.  Robinson  and  his  followers :  Some  renounce  all 
Religious  communion  both  publique  and  private  with  any  member 
of  that  Church  whosoevei",  as  Mr.  Ainsworth  and  such  as  hearken 
^^lto  him,  being  deepest  and  stiffest  in  their  Schisme.  The  evil  of 
this  separation  is  great :  First,  the  mindes  of  many  are  troubled 
and  distracted  hereby  ;  even  of  such  as  do  not  separate,  but  have 
some  liking  thereof ;... Secondly,  for  those  that  separate  but  do  not 
yet  joyne  vnto  them,  or  being  joyned  do  withhold  from  actual 
communion,  living  alone  and  hearing  the  word  of  God  in  no  Church, 
as  some  do;... Fourthly,  for  further  and  greater  evilles  into  which 
they  are  given  up  ;  it  is  apparant  that  three  or  four  hundred  of  the 
Brownists  have  brought  forth  more  Apostate  Anabaptists  and 
Arians  sometimes  in  one  yeare  then  ten  thousand  members  of  the 
Reformed  Dutch  Church  in  this  citie  [Amsterdam],  have  done  in 
ten  yeares  or  more,... 

The  history  of  Ainsworth's  congregation  for  at  least  a  dozen 

years  after  his  death  is  more  or  less  directly  connected  with  the 

name   of    Sabine    Staresmore.     We   may   therefore   turn   our 

attention  to  this  individual  who  now  so  suddenly  comes  into 

special  prominence.     Staresmore  first  appears  as  one   of  the 

leaders   at   the   organization   of    Henry   Jacob's    Independent 

(Puritan,  non-separatist)  congregation  at  London  in  1616,  where 

he  entered  into  the  regular  non-separatist  covenant.     In  1618 

Staresmore  was  betrayed  into  the  hands  of  the  Bishops  by 

Francis  Blackwell,  the  previously  mentioned  elder  of  Johnson's 

congregation  who  was  then  about  to  sail  for  Virginia^     By 

1619  Staresmore  seems  to  have  been  released,  and  was  still  a 

member  of  Jacob's  church,  as  is  evident  from  a  work,  of  which  we 

shall   hear  more  later,  published   in  that  year,  and  entitled, 

"THE  I  VNLAWFVLNES  |  OF  READING  IN  |  PRAYER.  | 

OR,    I    THE     ANSWER     OF     Mr.    Ri-1  chard     Mavnsel 

PREACHER,  I  VNTO  CERTAIN  ARGVMENTS,  1  or  Reasons, 

drawne  against  the  using,  or  commu-|nicating,  in,  or  with  the 

Booke  of  Com-[mon  Prayer  (imposed  to  be  reade  for  (  prayer 

to  God)  in  the  Parish  |  Assemblies  of  Eng-jland.  |  WITH  \  A 

Defence  of  the  same  Reasons,  by  Sabine  Staresmore.  |  . . . ". 

^  Governor  Bradford  telli^  of  this  affair,  and  gives  the  text  of  two  or 
three  letters  of  Staresmore. 


172  Early  English  Dissenters 

Apparently  sometime  within  the  years  1619-1621  Stares- 
more  "  went  to  Mr.  [Nicholas  ?]  Lee,  and  his  people  [the 
remnant  of  the  Barrowist  congregation  in  London]  and  desired 
of  them  Communion  signifying  to  them  "  that  he  was  of  their 
opinions  and  "  in  the  same  Covenant "  as  a  member  of  Henry 
Jacob's  church,  "  &  so  got  into  theire  Communion :  But  when 
they  came  to  heare  that  Mr.  S.[taresmore]  had  deceiued  them : 
ther  was  a  meeting  appointed  betvvene  Mr.  Lee  and  his 
people,  &  Mr.  lacobe  and  his  people,  at  the  which  Mr.  Sta.[res- 
more]  himselfe  was  presente  and  three  other  men  which 
afterwards  were  members  of  our  [Ainsworth's]  Church  which 
testified  vnto  vs,  how  things  was  caried :  so  being  come 
together,  Mr.  lacobe  their  manifested  as  the  truth  was  that 
they  never  intended  separation  from  the  Church  of  England : 
appearing  to  Mr.  S.[taresmore].  I  [A.(nthony  ?)  T.(hatcher  ?)] 
for  witnesse  saying  their  sittes  Mr.  S.[taresmore]  lett  him  gain- 
say it  if  he  can :  to  the  which  speech,  hee  had  not  one  word  to 
gainsay  "^ 

Evidently  about  1622  Staresmore  went  to  Holland  where 
he  hoped  to  find  a  congenial  church  home.  On  arriving  in 
Amsterdam,  however,  he  seems  to  have  sought  to  enter 
Ainsworth's  congregation  without  further  covenanting  on  the 
ground  of  having  been  a  member  of  the  "  Ancient  Church  "  in 
London  under  the  charge  of  Mr  Lee,  and  he  had  almost 
persuaded  Ainsworth  to  admit  him,  when  the  three  persons 
who  had  been  in  Lee's  congregation  and  had  attended  the 
previously  mentioned  conference  concerning  his  case,  testified 
against  him^.  Staresmore,  in  spite  of  this  opposition,  continued 
to  claim  that  Jacob's  congregation  were  for  "  the  most  part 
separated"  and  must  have  been  conditionally  admitted  as  a 
member,  but  while  it  is  well  known  that  Jacob's  church 
separated  from  evil  and  the  world,  it  is  equally  well  understood, 
as  appears  in  the  preceding  extended  citation,  that  they,  like  all 
Independent  Puritan  congregations,  never  intended  separation 

*  A.  T.'s  "A  Christian  Reprofe  against  Contention",  1631,  p.  5.  The 
initials  A.  T.  may  stand  for  Anthony  Thatcher,  whose  name  appears  in 
George  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  1603,  p.  63. 

■^  Ibid. 


The  Barrowists  on  the  Continent  173 

from  the  Church  of  England,  ami  did  not  mention  such  separa- 
tion in  their  covenant.  However,  Staresmorc  may  have  meant 
that  there  were  many  men  of  separatist  opinions  in  Jacob's 
congregation.  This  interpretation  does  not  appear  to  be  im- 
possible. 

Ainsworth  died  in  1622  soon  after  Staresmore's  arrival,  and 
evidently  left  two  elders  in  charge  of  the  congregation,  namely 
Jean  de  I'Ecluse  and  Giles  Thorpe,  the  latter  of  whom  apparently 
died  not  long  after.  His  place  seems  to  have  been  taken  by 
Henr}"  May,  who  had  long  been  a  member  of  the  churchy  but  the 
offices  of  pastor  and  teacher  were  certainly  left  unfilled  for  some 
yeai-s,  since  John  Paget  says  in  1635,  "for  many  yeares  together" 
the  Ainsworthians  "  were  without  Sacraments,  and  had  neither 
Lords  Supper  nor  Baptisme  administred  in  their  Church,  their 
children  for  many  yeares  remayning  unbaptised,  and  sundry 
dying  unbaptized"l  In  other  words,  there  was  no  pastor  or 
teacher  in  the  congregation  until  after  the  anival  of  John  Canne 
about  1630. 

In  1622  or  1623  after  Ainsworth's  death,  Staresmore  and 
others  who  sympathized  with  him  were  cast  out  of  the  church. 
This  action  was  taken  on  the  ground  that  Staresmore  had  mis- 
represented his  case  and  had  caused  the  congregation  incorrectly 
to  believe  that  he  was  a  separatist.  Such  a  course,  it  must  be 
admitted,  was  not  entirely  unnatural,  if  the  facts  were  as  repre- 
sented, but  it  was  unfortunate,  as  it  involved  the  church  in 
a  division  that  lasted  for  many  years.  Staresmore  was  a  man  of 
persistent  purpose,  and  not  easily  turned  aside  from  attaining 
his  object.  Hence,  almost  every  Sunday  for  some  time,  we  are 
told,  he  and  his  followers  continued  to  attend  the  church 
services,  and  to  create  more  or  less  disturbance.  Says 
A.[nthony  ?]  T.[hatcher  1]^  '■— 

to  bring  their  porposes  [sic]  about,  they  came  most  Lords  dayes, 
diuers  years  &  troubled  vs  with  great  desturbance,  may  haue  been 

'  He  is  mentioned  as  being  a  member  of  Johnson's  congregation  before 
1603. 

2  In  ".4n  Answer  To  the  unjust  complaints  of  William  Best",  Am- 
sterdam, 1635,  p.  134. 

3  In  his  "A  Christian  Reprofe",  1631,  p.  iii. 


174  Emdij  English  Disse^iters 

the  prouocations,  which  they  haue  vsed  towards  vs  to  provoke  vs : 
so  that  wee  may  truely  say,  that  as  Paule  had  fought  with  beast  [sic] 
at  Ephesus,  so  haue  wee  at  Amsterdam,  fought  with  men  of  a 
beasthke  condition, . . . 

In  1623  Staresmore  prepared  and  published  a  "Loving 
Tender",  consisting  of  sixteen  questions  and  answers  propounded 
to  the  congregation  and  asking  for  peace  and  moderation, — a 
request,  however,  to  which  little  heed  was  paid.  No  copy  of 
this  work  appears  to  be  in  existence  to-day. 

As  the  publication  of  this  little  book  did  not  bring  about 
the  desired  result,  Staresmore  evidently  went  to  Leyden* 
about  the  beginning  of  the  year  1623/4,  and,  as  was  natural, 
was  welcomed  into  John  Robinson's  Independent  Puritan* 
congregation  without  further  covenanting.  Soon  after  he 
returned  to  Amsterdam,  and  knowing  that  the  churches  of 
Ainsworth  and  Robinson  had  been  to  a  certain  extent  in 
communion,  he  now  expected  to  be  received  as  a  member  of 
the  remnant  of  that  congregation  under  de  I'Ecluse.  What  was 
his  chagrin,  when  his  request  continued  to  be  firmly  refused ! 
The  church  now  seems  to  have  written  to  Mr  Lee's  congregation 
at  London  asking  about  Staresmore's  standing  there.  The 
answer  was  first  sent  to  Jean  de  I'Ecluse  at  Amsterdam  who  was 
to  forward  it  to  Leyden^  He  appears,  however,  to  have  retained 
the  answer  for  some  time,  and  Robinson  also  after  he  had 
received  it  did  not  hasten  to  reply,  as  he  hoped  before  so  doing  to 
see  a  peaceful  settlement  of  Staresmore's  difficulties.    Finally,  on 

1  Says  A.  T.  in  "A  Christian  Reprofe",  p.  19,  "  first  as  I  haue  before 
showed  when  hee  creept  into  Mr.  Lees  people  into  their  comniuniou,  and 
after  that  cam  ouer  heare,  and  would  haue  had  communion  with  vs  :  but 
hee  seeing  himselfe  to  haue  resistance  heare,  after  this  hee  went  to  Leyden, 
and  creept  into  that  Church,  and  so  made  of  them  a  bridge  to  git  in 
vnto  vs..."  "  See  Chapter  xii. 

3  In  John  Robinson's  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of  Hearing  of  the 
Ministers  in  the  church  of  England :...",  1634,  pp.  68-9.  This  letter  also 
indicates  that  a  question  had  arisen  in  Mr  Lee's  congi-egation  concerning 
a  maid  who  had  joined  in  the  separatist  covenant  with  the  other  members, 
and  nevertheless  had  gone  to  worship  with  Mr  "  lakobs  people ",  whom 
Mr  Lee's  company  in  1624  seem  to  have  regarded  as  "  Idolaters  in  their 
going  to  the  assemblies", — the  question  being,  whether  this  maid  should 
be  retained  as  a  member,  or  excommunicated. 


The  Barroioists  on  the  Continent  175 

April  5,  1624,  Robinson  wrote  the  letter  which  was  published 
in  1634  at  the  close'  of  his  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of 
Hearing  of  the  Ministers  in  the  church  of  England".  In  this, 
it  should  be  noticed,  he  entirely  exonerates  Staresmore  and 
his  wife  in  their  relations  to  the  church  in  Leyden.  The  letter 
was  publicly  read  before  the  whole  congregation  and  Avith  their 
consent  was  sent  to  London.  Still  the  church  at  Amsterdam  was 
not  satisfied,  and  accordingly  a  communication  lamenting  their 
weakness,  and  bitterly  complaining  of  Staresmore  was  sent 
to  Leyden.  To  this  Robinson  replied  in  a  letter  written  on 
Sept.  18,  1624,  stating  that  he  thought  Staresmore,  in  spite  of 
his  differences  of  opinion  and  for  the  common  good,  ought  to  be 
received  as  a  member  of  the  church  at  Amsterdam  I  Member- 
ship, however,  was  still  denied. 

Finding  that  nothing  could  be  accomplished  with  Jean  de 
I'Ecluse  and  Giles  Thorpe,  or  more  probably  with  de  I'Ecluse 
and  Henry  May,  Staresmore  and  his  followers  decided  to 
organize  an  independent  Puritan,  non-separatist,  congregation 
of  their  own.  This  they  effected  shortly  after  by  entering  into 
covenant  "to...walke  in  the  trueth,  so  far  as  they  see  or  vnder- 
stand"^  Staresmore's  new  undertaking  seems  to  have  met 
with  great  success  at  first,  and  his  followers  soon  became  "a 
great  company"*,  while  de  I'Ecluse's  church  remained  weak  as 
it  had  been  even  in  1624.  The  members  of  these  two  churches 
apparently  lived  near  each  other,  but  they  had  no  pleasant 
relations  with  one  another^ 

Evidently  by  1630  the  condition  of  Staresmore's  company 
had  changed  very  materially.  The  membership  had  greatly 
diminished,  and  this  fact  together  with  the  circumstance  that 
John  Canne  may  already  have  become  pastor  of  the  remnant  of 
Ainsworth's  church,  may  have  roused  him  once  more  to  seek  a 
union  with  de  I'Ecluse.  In  this  year  accordingly  he  published 
another  book,  to  which  reference  has  already  been  made,  and 

»  Pp.  65-77. 

2  Published  in  Staresmore's  "  Certain  Notes  Of  M.  Henry  Aynsworth 
his  last  Sermon  ",  16.30,  pp.  xxxiii-xl. 

3  A.  T.'s  "A  Christian  Reprofe",  1631,  p.  16. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  41.  5  /f){^.^  p.  40. 


176  Early  English  Dissenters 

which  he  hoped  would  heal  the  breach,  entitled,  "  CERTAIN 
NOTES  I  0/  I  M.  HENRY  AYNSWORTH  |  HIS  LAST 
SERMON.  I  Taken  hy  pen  in  tJie  publique  delivery  by  one  of  \  his 
jiock,  a  little  before  his  death.  |  Anno  1622.  ...",  8°.  This  work 
contains  three  main  sections,  the  first  prepared  by  Staresmore  con- 
sisting of  a  narrative  of  the  troubles  of  the  congregation,  etc.,  and 
notes  taken  of  Ainsworth's  last  sermon;  the  second,  "An  Appeale 
on  Trvths  Behalf",  being  one  of  the  letters  to  which  reference  has 
previously  been  made,  written  by  John  Robinson  on  Sept.  18, 
1624 ;  the  third,  "  Certain  Observations  of  that  Reverend,  reli- 
gious and  faithfull  servant  of  God,  and  glorious  Martyr  of  lesus 
Christ,  M.  Randal  Bate,  which  were  part  of  his  daily  meditations 
in  the  time  of  his  sufferings,  whilst  he  was  prisoner  in  the  Gate- 
house at  Westminster."  Randal  Bate  is  otherwise  an  almost 
entirely  unknown  character.  John  Cotton  somewhere  refers 
to  him,  but  here  his  views  are  very  fully  given,  though  unfor- 
tunately almost  nothing  appears  concerning  his  life-history.  He 
was  evidently  an  Independent  Puritan  of  the  "  Jacobite  "  type, 
and  may  have  been  a  member  of  Jacob's  congregation  in  London. 

Staresmore's  work  was  answered  by  A.[nthony?]  T.[hatch- 
er?],  who  published  in  1631  the  previously  mentioned  "A  | 
CHRISTIAN  REPROFE  |  AGAINST  |  CONTENTION.  | 
Wherin  is  declared  and  manifested  a  just  defence  of  the  Church, 
against  such  slanders  and  reproches  which  Sabine  |  Staresmore 
hath  layd  vpon  vs  in  his  two  bookes,  the  first  |  being  16.  Ques- 
tions, called  A  louing  tender.  The  second  is  his  |  Preface  and 
Postscript  befor  and  behind  Mr.  Ans worths  last  |  Sermon,  and 
making  a  pretence  by  that  to  sett  it  out  as  a  |  loue  token,  hee 
breatheth  out  his  malice  against  vs :  |  And  lastly  her  is  an 
Answer  to  a  Letter  written  |  to  Mr.  Robinson,  and  sent  to  vs 
with  the  1  consent  of  his  Church,  which  now  |  Mr.  Staresmore 
hath  published  |  to  the  world.  |  To  these  things  an  Answer  is 
giuen  by  A.  T....  ",  4°,  pp.  iv,  43. 

In  this  work  it  is  claimed  that  de  I'Ecluse's  congregation  had 
borne  with  Staresmore's  views  before  he  was  ejected,  and 
probably  would  have  been  still  more  patient,  if  he  had  not  been 
"  so  bussie  &  vnrestty  ",  that  is  presumably,  in  winning  others  to 
his  own  way  of  thinking,  which  was  contrary,  of  course,  to  the 


The  Barroioists  on  the  Continent  177 

general  opinion  of  the  church.  It  is  also  stated  that  Stares- 
more's  company  was  now  smaller  than  that  of  de  I'Ecluse,  and  in 
fact  had  "  allmost  come  to  nothing ".  The  following  passage 
concerning  this  point  is  so  illuminating  that  it  may  be  given  in 
full':— 

In  deed  nearliest  in  dwelling,  but  fardist  of  in  affection  as  it  may 
appeare,  not  only  by  this  bitter  Letter,  but  also  to  strangers,  as 
occasionally  they  passe  by  their  dwellings  [i.e.,  of  Staresmore's 
company]  by  whome  it  cometh  to  our  eares,  how  bitterly  they 
[Staresmore's  followers]  inuay  against  vs  [de  FEcluse  and  the  Ains- 
worthians] ;  and  what  is  the  cause,  because  wee  wil  not  receiue 
their  new  found  vvayes  of  declining,  and  because  wee  dislike  that 
they  looke  not  better  to  the  Lords  watch  in  suffering  their  members 
to  apostat  :  some  declining  to  the  Church  of  England,  ifc  their  lining, 
other  going  a  great  compasse  to  new  England  to  communicat  with 
the  Church  of  England :  and  some  that  are  in  this  Land  professe  to 
hear  in  the  assemblies,  as  they  have  occasion ;  and  I  make  no 
doubte,  but  they  haue  don  it  many  times  :  and  this  their  negligent 
watch  hath  affected  [them  ?]  so,  that  from  a  great  company  they 
are  allmost  come  to  nothing  or  fewer  then  those  whom  they  despies, 
and  haue  sayd  concerning  vs,  that  our  contentions  would  break  vs 
to  peeces. 

In  1630  it  is  probable  that  Staresmore  was  in  England  for 
a  time.  We  arrive  at  this  conclusion  by  a  comparison  of  two 
passages  from  widely  different  sources  which  seem  to  refer 
to  the  same  unusual  incident.  One  passage  is  in  A.  T.'s  "  A 
Christian  Reprofe",  1631,  in  which  the  following  words  occur: 
"  yet  since  hee  [Staresmore]  was  cast  out  from  vs,  hee  went  and 
had  communion  with  them  [members  of  the  Parish  churches  in 
England],  and  baptized  his  child  with  them  also"-.  The  other 
passage  is  in  the  so-called  Jessey  Records  (No.  1  of  the  Gould 
Manuscript,  of  which  we  shall  hear  more  in  a  subsequent 
chapter),  three  paragraphs  from  the  close  :  "  Whilst  M''  Lathorp 
[John  Lathrop]  was  an  Elder  here  [in  Jacob's  church]  some 
being  greived  against  one  that  had  his  Child  then  [1630] 
Baptized  in  the  Common  Assemblies,...".  However,  if  Stares- 
more was  in  England  in  1630,  it  is  probable  that  he  was  in 
Holland  during  both  1632  and  1633,  as  we  shall  see  later.  He 
was  certainly  in  that  country  sometime  in  1633. 

1  Pp.  40-41.  2  P.  20. 

B.  12 


178  Early  English  Dissenters 

According  to  the  Jessey  Records  John  Canne  [Mr.  Can] 
with  some  others  went  to  Holland,  i.e.,  Amsterdam,  in  or  about 
1630.  Here  he  seems  to  have  been  quickly^  chosen  pastor  of 
de  I'Ecluse's  congregation,  and  at  once  began  to  strengthen 
that  forlorn  church.  Benjamin  Hanbury  in  his  "  Historical 
Memorials  "^  mentions  a  work  by  Canne  entitled, '  "  The  Way  to 
Peace  :  or,  Good  Counsel  for  it.  Preached  upon  the  15th  day  of 
the  second  Month  1632[-3],  at  the  Reconciliation  of  certain 
Brethren,  between  whom  there  had  been  former  Differences." 
12mo.'  Hanbury  seems  to  me  to  have  made  a  mistake  in 
giving  the  date  of  this  sermon  as  1632/33.  April  15,  1632, 
appears  to  be  the  correct  date,  not  Feb.  15,  1632/33,  nearly  a 
year  later,  as  Hanbury  evidently  supposed.  Hanbury  never 
saw  this  work,  and  Dr  Dexter,  like  myself,  had  seen  no  reference 
to  it  in  contemporary  literature.  However,  it  is  probably 
mentioned  somewhere  either  by  Canne  or  by  one  of  his 
opponents,  though  it  may  have  circulated  only  in  manuscript, 
or  have  been  printed  by  Canne  himself  in  a  very  small  edition. 
It  is  certainly  disappointing  that  the  contents  of  this  sermon 
are  not  known  to-day,  as  we  would  undoubtedly  find  some 
interesting  information  therein,  but  the  mere  title  perhaps 
gives  us  the  most  suggestive  and  important  point  of  all,  namely, 
that  Canne  may  temporarily  have  succeeded  in  healing  the 
long  standing  breach  between  de  I'Ecluse  and  Staresmore, — a 
truly  notable  achievement. 

As  has  already  been  stated,  Staresmore  was  certainly  in 
Holland  for  a  time  in  1633,  since  in  a  letter  of  Alexander 
Browne  to  Sir  William  Boswell,  dated  Rotterdam,  Dec.  13 
[1633],  there  is  mentioned  "one  Stasmore  a  Brownist.  who  is 
discontented  about  the  busines  [of  surreptitiously  publishing 
certain  Bibles]..."* 

Peace,  however,  did  not  reign  for  long  in  the  reunited 
Ainsworthian  church,  for  de  I'Ecluse  was  evidently  dissatisfied 

1  This  appears  to  be  implied  in  John  Paget's  "A  Defence  of  Chvrch- 
Government ",  London,  1641,  4",  p.  33,  where  he  speaks  of  "  M"'  Canne"  as 
being  "  rashly  elected  a  Minister  by  the  Brownists  "  in  Amsterdam. 

2  Vol.  I.,  p.  516. 

3  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  146  verso,  in  the  British  Museum. 


The  Barroioists  on  the  Continent  179 

with  Canne's  sudden  exaltation  to  the  pastoral  office,  and  would 
not  work  harmoniously  with  him.  In  fact,  "  shortly  after  that 
election",  we  are  toldS  Canne  "was  censured  and  deposed  from 
his  office  by  that  half  [of  the  congregation]  that  rejected  him 
&  renounced  communion  with  him ".  Concerning  these  new 
troubles,  says  Henry  Elsynge  in  a  letter  to  Sir  William  Boswell, 
dated,  Amsterdam,  June  6,  1633  : — 

There  are  very  pretty  differences  now  in  motion  betweene  the 
Brownists  heere  [in  Amsterdam],  they  haue  diuided  their  BrotJier- 
hoods,  name  </oe  along  toith  lohn  D^eduse,  soniie  with  Af  Kan  [Canne], 
the  two  heads  of  that  diuided  Bodye  of  which  indeede  there  are 
none  willing  to  bee  feete,  or  any  other  enferior  members,  they  would 
all  bee  heads  :  lohn  D'ecluse  has  deliuered  vp  to  Sathan  jf  Kan, 
it  his  Sectaries,  &  M^  Kan  toill  shortly  bee  ready,  to  doe  him  ds  his, 
the  like  courtesie^. 

In  his  work  as  pastor  Canne  had  such  success  that  by  1634 
it  was  supposed  that  some  even  in  Robinson's  church  at  Leyden 
might  say  that  the  Word  of  God  "  is  Gods  word  if  M^.  Canne 
shall  preach  it :  but  if  another,  that  is  a  Minister  in  England 
preach  the  same  it  is  none  of  Gods  word  "^. 

Before  Sir  William  Brereton,  Bart.,  reached  Amsterdam 
about  1634/35,  there  seems  to  have  been  still  another  change 
of  leadership  among  the  Brownists,  for  he  says* : — 

the  Brownists  [are]  divided,  and  differing  amongst  themselves ; 
Mr.  Canne  being  the  pastor  of  one  company,  and  one  Greenwood, 
an  old  man,  a  tradesman,  who  sells  stockings  in  Exchange... is  the 
leader  of  another  company. 

This  passage  may  indicate  thatdel'Ecluse  had  left  Amsterdam, 
or  was  now  dead,  and  that  this  Greenwood  had  succeeded  to  his 
position  of  leader  among  those  Avho  were  opposed  to  Canne. 

One  of  the  Amsterdam  Barrowists  who  gave  up  his  separatism, 
and  evidently  joined  the  church  of  John  Paget  some  time  after 
Ainsworth's  death  in  1622,  was  one  Stephen  Ofifwood.    Little  or 

>  John  Paget's  "A  Defence  of  Chvrch-Government ",  1641,  p.  33. 

2  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  142,  in  the  British  Museum. 

3  John  Robinson's  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of  Hearing  of  the 
Ministers  in  the  church  of  England  :...",  1634,  p.  xvii. 

*  "Travels  in  Holland. ..M.DC.XXXIV-M.DC.XXXV",  Chetham  So- 
ciety, Vol.  I.,  1844,  pp.  64-5. 

12—2 


180  Em'ly  English  Dissenters 

nothing  appears  to  have  been  known  about  him  until  recently,  but 
he  evidently  kept  a  boarding-house.  In  1633  Thomas  Cranford 
is  mentioned  as  being  one  "  who  doth  vsually  eate  at  Stephen 
ofwoods"\  and  in  1634  or  1635  Sir  William  Brereton  speaks  of 
Offwood  as  being  his  host  in  Amsterdam ^  It  was  also  reported 
in  1633  that  "  Stephen  ofwood  is  certainely  the  man  which 
procures  the  printing  of  all  the  blew  bookes. .  ."^  Henry  Elsynge 
in  the  previously  mentioned  letter  to  Sir  William  Boswell,  dated 
June  6,  1633,  has  the  following  reference  to  him*: — 

Stephen  Offwod  my  Host  was  once  one  of  the  [Barrowist]  Brotherhood, 
hut  tis  lonij  since  hee  fell  from  it:  hut  his  tvife  <&:  children  continuing 
still  among  them,  hee  has  ivritten  a  hooke  ivhich  hee  directs  to  them,  in 
which  hee  layes  the  Brownists  very  open,  d;  layes  downe  motiues  <£• 
reasons  to  his  wife  &  children,  ivhy  they  should  forsake  (as  hee  termes 
them)  their  ahominac\i'\ons :  but  that  hee  maye  shew  himselfe  auerse 
to  the  Church  of  England  d;  the  discipline  therein  setled  &  approued 
of,  hee  has  a  Tract  wherein  hee  shewes  that  the  English  of  these 
Churches  heere,  had  very  good  reason  to  leaue  the  Church  of  England, 
hringes  in  a  short  Narratiue  of  the  Troubles  of  Franckfort,  when  the 
English  first  endeauored  in  the  beginning  of  Queene  Maryes  tyme,  to 
erect  a  Church  there,  <fc  vpon  that  occasion,  brings  in  likewise  the... 
opinion  of  M^  Calvin,  Bullinger  &  others  of  our  Booke  of  Common 
Prayer:  but  that  I  feare  your  occasions,  would  not  dispence  with 
soe  vnworthy  an  Interruption,  I  had  sent  you  the  Booke — 

No  copy  of  Offwood's  work  seems  to  be  known  to-day,  and 
this  is  the  fullest  description  we  have  of  it  at  present.  It  was 
apparently  composed  of  two  parts,  the  first  devoted  to  his 
family  and  the  evils  of  Brownism,  and  the  other,  here  called  a 
tract,  showing  the  value  and  reasonableness  of  the  English 
Puritan  (non-separatist)  churches  on  the  Continent.  The  book 
was  evidently  published  some  time  between  1624  and  1630,  and 
at  least  two  further  references  to  it  have  come  down  to  us.  In 
one  instance,  it  is  referred  to  as  Stephen  Offwood's  book  against 
the  Brownists,  and  more  particularly  styled  "Heady  &  rash 
Censures"^.     In  the  other  reference,  it  is  called  an  "  Advei'tise- 

1  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  146  verso,  in  the  British  Museum. 

2  "Travels  in  Holland",  Chetham  Society,  Vol.  i.,  1844,  p.  57. 

3  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  146  verso. 
*  Ibid.,  fol.  142. 

^  See  John  Paget's  "vlw  Answer  To  the  unjust  complaints  of  William 
Best",  Amsterdam,  1635,  p.  87. 


A   TRVE    AND 

SHORT  DECLARATION    ,  BOTH.  OF   THB 

GATHERING   AND    lOYNING    TOGETHER 

OF    CERTAINE   PERSONS:  AND    ALSO   0> 

THE  LAMENTABLE  BREACH  ANQ 

DIVISION   WHICH   FELt 

AM9NGST  THEM . 


THERE  WcrecertirneperronsioBnglaad.ofvvhich.fome  were  brought vp ill 
fckooles,  &  in  the  Vniuerfitie  of  Ci(nbridge,& fome  in  families  &  lioulhouldes,  as 
Isthtmaoncrofthacco  mtrie.  Someof  thefe  which  had  liucd&ftudicd  inCam- 
trtgc.vvcretherjkaovvne&countcdforvvard  in  religion,  &  others  airo  both  there  &.'iii 
thecontfic  fvcrc  niorecarefull  &  zebus,  th'ro  their  fro  ward  enimies  could  futfer.  They  ia 
Carpbrige  were  fcattercd  from  thenfe.tbne  to  one  traJc  oflifc,&:  fome  to  an  other:a$  Ro- 
b'crtBroune,RobertHarriron,Willum  Harrifon,  Philip  Brouue.Robcrt  Barker.  Some  of 
oFthtrfe applied  ihefcluesto  teach  fchollers:  to  the  which  Iabour,R.  Brounealfogauehioi 
felfc  ,fov  the  fpace  of  threcyearcs .He  hauir.g  a  fpccial  care  to  teach  religion  with  other  lear- 
*  otng.did  thereby  kecpc  htsfch  Hers  in  fuch  ivy;  &  good  oider.as  all  theTounfcme  where 
he  taught  gaue  riim  witncs.Yct  the  world  being  fo  corrupt  as  it  is,  &  the  times  fo  periloas 
He  greatly  mifliked  the  wintcs  &  dcfaulte$,vvh;ch  he  fawe  eueric  vvhere,&  marcked  plai 
ijrthat  without  red' elTe,  nether  the  parentes  could  longreioifcin  their  chiidren.nor  the 
chiHrcn  profit  To  much  n  religion  ,  as  that  their  other  ftudies  &Iearning  might  be  bleflbi 
ijicrcby  Hereuppon  hcfcll  into  great  care,&  was  foarcgrecued  whilchc  long  coufiderei 
in  inie  thinges  amiflc,?;  the  caufc  of  all, to  be  the  woful!  and  lamEtable  ftate  offthechurch.    ^ 
Wherefore  he  laboured  much  to  kno  we  his  duetie  in  fuch  ihiget,  &  becaufe  the  church  of 
.Cod  ishis  kiagdoiT),&:  his  name  efpccially  is  thereby  magnifitd;he  wholy  benthim  felfe  to 
fearh  &  findoutthclaatterf  ofthechurch.ashowit  was  tobeguided  &  ordered, &  what    ■ 
abufej  there  were  in  the  ecdefiaftical  gouernment  then  vfed  .  Thcfe  thioges ,  he  had  long    ! 
,.l)efofcdi.batcd in  him  rflfe,&  with  others,  &  fuffcredalfoforoc  trouble  about  thf  atCa- 
'^brigcyet  nowoonfrcflihefethis  mind  on  thcfe  thinges,&  night  &rday  didconfult  with 
ijrimfrifc  &:  others  about  thc.Ieiil  he  ftioul  J  be  ignorant,  or  miftake  anieotfthofemarters. 
tWhat  fo  eucr  thinges  h:  ff  )und  bdonging  ro  the  church,  &  to  his  calling  as  a  mfbcr  off'ihe 
F.charch,h?didputit  hipnftu  Tor  eucnItlechilHrcn  are  offthe  church  &  kingdom  off  God 
&Waaff(uchfaithChrift,dofhhivkfngdomcon^>ft.-  &  therefore  both  in  his  fcholrhelaboii'- 
%ndthil  thekingdom  off  Go  J  might  appear*,^  alfo  jo  ihoU  of  thi-  tovvoe  with  whom  he 

First  page  of  Eobkrt  Browne's  "Trve  and  Short  Declaration"  [ir)83  i]. 
(Size  of  original  7,;^  in.  x"),';.  in.)     See  Vol.   i.,  page  107. 


The  Barrow ists  on  the  Continent  181 

m&nt  to  John  De  lecluse  and  H.  May  "^  At  this  time  Offwood 
was  averse  to  the  Church  of  England  as  established,  as  well  as 
to  the  Brownists,  and  in  the  end  he  was  also  not  especially 
enthusiastic  over  Paget's  church  which  was  connected  with  the 
Dutch  Classis,  for  we  are  told  that  he  soon  began  to  complain 
of  the  power  of  the  Classis*. 

Canne  appears  to  have  remained  with  the  Amsterdam  con- 
gregation for  about  nine  years  without  intermission.  During 
this  period  evidently  he  not  only  took  entire  charge  of  the 
church  without  the  assistance  of  elders,  but  also  at  the  same 
time  ambitiously  undertook  "  the  care  and  charge  of  divers 
other  trades,  as  of  a  Printers  work-house  in  one  place,  of  a 
Brandery  or  Aqua  vitse  shop  in  another  place,  and  specially 
of  an  Alchy mists  laboratory  in  another  place  "^  He  was  a 
vigorous  separatist,  and  in  1634  boldly  published  a  work 
bearing  the  title,  "  A  Necessitie  of  Separation  From  the  Church 
of  England"^,  and  in  1639  another  entitled,  "A  Stay  against 
Straying".  About  1640/41  Canne  seems  to  have  made  a  short 
visit  to  England,  and  in  the  spring  of  1641  we  find  him  in 
Bristol  and  other  places,  but  he  must  soon  (i.e.,  probably  some 
time  in  1641)  have  returned  to  Amsterdam.  He  was  certainly 
not  an  Anabaptist  at  this  time*. 

Robert  Baillie  sums  up  the  later   history  of  Ainsworth's 

church  in  the  following  words'^ : — 

Ainsworths's  \sic\  company,  after  his  death,  remained  long  without 
all  [i.e.,  in  reality,  the  two  chief]  Officers,  very  like  to  have  dis- 
solved :  yet  at  last,  after  much  strife,  they  did  chuse  one  Master 
Cann  for  their  Pastor,  but  could  not  agree,  til  very  lately,  upon 
any  other  Officer,  and  even  yet  [in  1645]  they  live  without  an 
Eldership,  as  they  did  before  without  a  Pastor. 

1  See  Dr  Edw.  Stillingfleet's  ^^Unreasonableness  of  Separatimi",  1681, 
p.  48. 

2  J.  Paget's  ''An  Answer...",  p.  87. 

3  J.  Paget's  "A  Defence  of  Chvrch-Government ",  1641,  p.  152. 

■•  Reprinted  by  the  Hansard  KnoUys  Society  in  1849  with  modernized 
text  and  with  an  Introductory  Notice  by  the  Rev.  Charles  Stovel. 

^  I  hope  to  present  my  reason  for  this  assertion  in  a  succeeding 
volume. 

*>  In  "A  Dissvassive  from  the  Errours  Of  the  Time",  London,  1645, 
p.  15. 


182  Early  English  Dissenters 

As  for  Sabine  Staresmore,  he  seems  not  long  to  have  been 
able  to  endure  John  Canne's  ministry,  and  once  more  to  have 
returned  to  England.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  he  was  in 
prison  in  London  in  1635^  On  May  27  or  29,  1644,  he  was 
present  at  a  meeting  of  Henry  Jessey's  congregation  in  London^, 
and  about  1647  was  evidently  alive,  and  perhaps  still  in  London. 
He  is  mentioned  in  the  second  section  of  John  Cotton's  "  The 
Bloudy  Tenent  Washed  "^  which  was  published  in  1647,  as  being 
friendly  to  Roger  Williams,  and  as  having  written  a  confutation 
of  Cotton's  letter  to  Williams. 

^  "Transactions  of  the  Baptist  Historical  Society"  for  January,  1910. 

2  The  Gould  Transcript  of  Benjamin  Stinton's  "  Repository  ",  No.  4. 

3  In  the  [second  section],  p.  1. 


CHAPTER  VII 

CERTAIN   OBSCURE   BARROWIST   AND   SEPARATIST 
CONGREGATIONS   BETWEEN    1588  AND   1641 

It  must  not  be  thought  that  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
sixteenth,  and  the  first  quarter  of  the  seventeenth,  centuries  the 
spread  of  separatist  opinions  was  accomplished  only  through  the 
agency  of  the  congregations  of  the  few  best-known  leaders.  No 
doubt,  in  various  quarters  of  England  similar  movements  Avei'e 
going  on  during  all  this  period  \  but  of  them  unfortunately  we 
have  but  little  infonnation.  Furthermore,  there  was  a  consider- 
able number  of  separatists  who  in  time  became  dissatisfied  with 
their  new  views  and  either  returned  to  the  Church  of  England, 
or  began  to  maintain  still  newer  doctrines,  as  we  shall  see  later 
in  this  chapter.  It  is  our  purpose  now  to  trace  some  of  these 
less  known  Barrowist  or  separatist  congregations  in  England  or 
Holland  before  and  during  1641. 

After  the  departure  of  Francis  Johnson  and  what  seems  to 
have  been  a  large  proportion  of  his  congregation  to  Amsterdam, 
some  Barrowists  appear  to  have  remained  in  London.  It  is 
evident,  however,  that  unless  William  Collins  had  succeeded  in 
organizing  the  second  Barrowist  company  in  London,  as  had 
been  intended,  there  cannot  have  been  any  fully  organized 
Barrowist  church  there  until  some  years  later.  And  that  no 
such  church  was  instituted  until  after  1603  is  made  very 
probable,  since  George  Johnson  in  his  "  discourse  ",  published  in 
that  year,  blames  his  brother  Francis  for  having  discouraged 

1  Before  1617  Brownists  or  Barrowists  are  known  to  have  come  from 
at  least  thirty-three  counties.  See  "The  Brownists  in  Amsterdam",  in 
the  "  Transactions"  of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society  for  September, 
1905,  p.  170. 


184  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  organization  of  the  London  company,  and  for  having  drawn 
over  to  Amsterdam  any  converted  Puritan  preachers  who  might 
have  made  suitable  officers  for  the  London  Barrowists.  He 
also  says  that  the  latter  had  wished  to  have  one  "  Mr  Cr." 
(certainly  not  Mr  Crane,  perhaps  Mr  Crud)  for  their  teacher, 
but  that  Francis  Johnson  and  Daniel  Studley  "  made  a  iarre 
betweene  the  people  and  him  ",  and  "  by  their  dealing  "  drove 
him  away\ 

How  soon  after  1603  the  London  congregation  was  organized, 
and  how  much  longer  it  existed,  does  not  appear  to  be  known, 
but  it  certainly  was  in  existence  in  1624,  and  also  in  1632^ 
This  congi'egation  was  probably  not  that  which  on  Oct.  22, 
1608,  was  described  as  "a  nest  or  assemblie  of  Brownists  dis- 
couered  on  Sonday  about  Finsburie,  wherof  Fine  or  sixe  and 
thirty  were  apprehended  with  theyre  preacher  one  Trundle  that 
vsed  to  exercise  at  christs-church  "^  We  can  only  be  certain 
that  one  Mr  Lee  appears  eventually  to  have  been  chosen  its 
leader  or  pastor.  We  also  know  that  the  London  Barrowists 
found  it  difficult  to  live  in  peace  with  each  other,  as  is  made 
plain  in  a  work^  published  in  1612  where  it  is  said,  that  "the 
companie  of  the  Brownists  remayning  in  London  haue  oft 
layed "  "  manifold  curses "  "  vpon  one  another,  one  halfe  de- 
uouring  another  at  once ". 

We  may,  I  think,  conjecture  with  reasonable  probability  the 
identity  of  the  above  mentioned  Mr  Lee.  It  will  be  noticed  on 
examining  the  deposition  of  Daniell  Bucke  (in  the  volume  of 
documents),  made  on  March  9, 1592/93,  that  he  refers  to  Thomas 
Lee  and  Nicholas  Lee,  or  Leye,  as  being  members  of  the  con- 

1  P.  44. 

2  See  John  Robinson's  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of  Hearing  of  the 
Ministers  in  the  church  of  England",  1634,  pp.  65-77,  where  a  letter  is 
given  which  was  sent  by  him  to  this  congregation  in  London,  dated, 
April  5,  1624.  In  the  volume  of  documents  see  also  the  so-called  Jessey 
Records  (from  the  Gould  Manuscript,  an  account  of  which  is  given  later 
in  this  volume)  under  the  date  May  12,  1632. 

3  In  a  letter  written  by  John  Chamberlain  to  Mr  Dudley  Carleton  at 
Eaton.    S.  P.,  Dom.,  James  I,  Vol.  37  (No.  25)  in  the  Public  Record  Office. 

*  "The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists",  1612, 
p.  63. 


Obscure  Separatist  Congregations  185 

gregation,  and  the  latter  as  being  a  deacon.  Nicholas  Lee  first 
appears  in  the  lists  of  prisoners  and  petitioners  of  1590,  but 
though  Bucke  mentions  Nicholas  and  Thomas  Lee  (they  may 
have  been  brothers)  in  1592/93,  it  should  be  noticed  that  neither 
of  them  seems  to  have  been  taken  prisoner.  At  any  rate,  they 
were  evidently  not  called  upon  to  make  depositions,  and  they 
almost  certainly  would  have  been,  had  they  been  in  prison,  nor 
is  either  of  them  reported  as  having  died  in  prison  before  the 
publication  of  the  "  Trve  Confession  "  of  Faith  of  1596. 

From  these  facts  the  inference  may  very  naturally  be  drawn 
that  the  deacon,  Nicholas  Lee,  as  the  only  officer  of  the  con- 
gregation who  apparently  had  not  been  captured  by  the  civil 
authorities,  now  took  charge  of  the  members  of  the  church  who 
were  still  free,  and  that  when  the  members  of  the  congregation 
who  had  been  imprisoned  were  subsequently  exiled  to  Holland, 
he  was  able  to  remain  in  London \  Being  probably  a  layman 
and  a  deacon,  he  would  not  be  expected  to  become  the  pastor  of 
the  congregation,  and  so  other  plans  for  the  choice  of  a  leader 
had  been  made  from  time  to  time  before  1603,  but  when  these 
plans  had  long  been  frustrated  for  one  cause  or  another,  it  is 
possible  that  finally  (i.e.,  at  some  time  after  1603)  he  was 
elected  to  the  pastor's  office,  in  which  Henry  Jacob  may  have 
found  him  about  1616  on  his  (Jacob's)  return  to  London.  In 
A.  T.'s  previously  mentioned  work  entitled,  "A  j  CHRISTIAN 
REPROFE  I  AGAINST  |  CONTENTION.  |  ...",  1631,  it  will 
be  remembered,  reference  is  made  to  Mr  Lee  and  his  congre- 
gation in  connection  with  "Mr.  lacobe  and  his  people"'*. 

As  early  as  1588  or  1589  we  find  that  there  were  Brownists 
not  only  in  and  about  London,  but  also  that  they  had  "  sparsed 
of  their  companies  into  seuerall  partes  of  the  Realme,  and 
namely,  into  the  West,  almost  to  the  vttermost  borders 
thereof "^ 

*  Johnson's  church  in  Amsterdam  had  only  one  deacon  at  first,  as 
appears  in  George  Johnson's  statement  in  "A  discourse",  1603,  p.  151. 
This  deacon  was  Christopher  Bowman, 

2  P.  5. 

3  S.[tephen]  B.[redwelljs  "THE  RASING  |  OF  THE  FOVNDA- 
TIONS  i  of  Brovvnisme",  London,  1588,  p.  iv. 


186  Early  English  Dissenters 

This  statement  is  of  special  interest  when  taken  in  con- 
nection with  the  fact  that  aa  late  as  1606  there  appears  to  have 
been  a  Brownist  or  Barrowist  congregation  "  in  the  West  parts 
of  England  "^  No  more  definite  location  of  this  church  is  given, 
but  we  may  possibly  infer  that  it  was  in  Wiltshire  in  or  near  the 
locality  where  "  one  Mr  lo.  le.  and  other  his  fellowes  "^  lived, 
who  had  "  bestowed  much  labour  in  reading  "  the  early  Barrowist 
and  Johnsonian  writings.  Perhaps  Gloucester  was  the  place 
intended  in  this  obscure  reference,  but  at  present  we  can  only 
conjecture,  as  Brownists  are  known  to  have  come  from  so  many 
places  in  the  western  shires^. 

To  this  church  in  the  west  of  England  Thomas  White^ 
Thomas  Powell,  and  others  to  the  number  of  twelve  or  thirteen 
joined, — a  group  which  later  seceded  and  retired  to  Amsterdam 
in  order  to  organize  a  church  of  their  own.  Of  the  movements 
of  the  seceding  company  of  Thomas  White,  Francis  Johnson 
gives  the  following  description^ : — 

When  they  had  left  the  Church  of  England,  as  having  an  Anti- 
christian  Ministery,  worship,  confusion,  &c.  they  first  joyned  in  & 
to  a  Church  in  the  West  parts  of  England  professing  the  same 
faith  with  vs  [Barrowists].  A  while  after,  they  came  over  hither, 
&  at  first  communicated  with  vs ;  but  afterward  (being  about  twelve 
or  thirteen)  they  joyned  themselves  here  as  a  body  together,  to  walk 
in  the  same  faith  and  way  as  we  do;  reputing  and  calling  them- 
selves a  Church,  distinct  from  vs. 

This  congregation  had  cherished  the  hope  of  becoming  a 
separate  church  in  England,  but  had  failed  to  realize  it,  and 
in  Holland  their  object  in  keeping  separate  from  Johnson's 

1  Francis  Johnson's  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas  White", 
1606,  p.  iii. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  12. 

3  See  "The  Brownists  in  Amsterdam",  pp.  170-71,  in  the  "Trans- 
actions" of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society  for  Sept.,  1905. 

*  See  Ibid.,  p.  162.  White  is  here  reported  to  have  lived  in  "  Sechten- 
fort ",  England.  This  is  evidently  intended  for  "  Slaugtenfort ",  Wiltshire, 
in  John  Speed's  "The  Theatre  of  the  Empire",  Loudon,  1611,  the  modern 
Slaughterford,  Wiltshire.  Mr  Madan  of  the  Bodleian  Library  agrees  with 
me  in  this  identification. 

*  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas  White  his  Discoverie  of 
Brovvnisme",  1606,  pp.  52-3. 


Obscure  Separatist  Congregations  187 

church  appears  to  have  been  partly  to  increase  the  number 
of  Ban-owist  churches,  and  partly  to  overcome  the  feeling 
of  some  critics  that  Francis  Johnson's  congregation  was  am- 
bitious to  lead,  and  perhaps  to  absorb,  the  other  separatist 
congregations \  It  is  made  evident  also  from  Johnson's  work 
that  before  1606  Thomas  White  had  returned  to  the  Church 
of  England  I 

By  1594  the  Barrowists,  or  separatists,  had  even  made  their 
way  into  Ireland,  for  Miles  Mickle-bound^  speaks  "of  one  of 
them  in  Ireland  ",  who  wrote  in  that  year  to  a  certain  Mr  Wood, 
a  Scottish  preacher  there.  Henry  Ainsworth  was  probably  one 
of  these  Barrowists,  and  may  even  have  written  the  letter  just 
mentioned. 

Another  Brownist  or  Barrowist  church  in  England  was 
situated  at  Norwich,  and  a  few  points  in  its  early  history  are  still 
preserved.  In  the  first  place,  George  Johnson  in  1603  speaks 
of  this  congregation  as  the  Amsterdam  church's  "  elder  sister  in 
the  Lord"^  so  that  it  must  have  been  in  existence  before  1587. 
This  fact  suggests  that  the  nucleus  of  the  church  in  Norwich 
was  formed  by  some  of  Robert  Browne's  "  companie  ",  who  had 
remained  in  England  after  his  departure  for  Holland  about  five 
years  before,  and  whom  he  may  have  revisited  on  his  return  to 
England  in  1584.  Even  after  Browne's  subscription  in  1585 
the  existence  of  the  congregation  appears  to  have  continued, 
and   some   time   between    1590  and   1593^  while   Father,   or 

1  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas  White  his  Discoverie  of 
Brovvnisme",  1606,  p.  53. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  iii.  He  was  married  in  Amsterdam  on  April  10,  1604,  to 
the  widow  of  John  Philips. 

3  "Mr.  HENRY  BARROWES  \  PLATFORM.  | ... ",  [1611],  8°,  sig. 
Cyii  verso. 

*  "A  discourse",  p.  89. 

6  u*j-u*^  j^^j^g  of  ^j^e  accusation  /  which  Mr.  Hunt  P.[astor]  of  the 
[Parish]  Church  at  Ohatsam  [Chattisham,  not  Chatham]  saieth  against 
M.  D.  St.[udleyJ  %  This  fel  out  about  12.  yeares  since  if  not  more,  so 
long  since  is  it  /  that  he  tirst  shewed  his  vsurping  and  pi'oud  miude  /  ..."] 
That  the  said  Mr.  Daiuel  [Daniel]  Studley  (when  |  goodman  Debnam  was 
in  prison  at  London,  and  two  of  the  elders,  the  deacons,  and  he  were  in 
prison  at  Norwich,  euen  then)  did  put  by  Tho.  Ensner  from  the  spirituall 
eiercises,  and  the  vse  of  that  gift  that  God  of  his  rich  mercy  had  given 


188  Early  English  Dissenters 

Goodman,  John  Debenham  was  in  prison  in  London  (i.e. 
about  1590  or  1591),  we  find  that  Daniel  Studley,  George 
Knifton,  Matthew  Slade,  and  Christopher  Bowman  visited  the 
Brownists  in  Norwich.  Their  object  may  have  been  to  escape 
persecution  in  London,  where  they  had  now  become  known,  and 
at  the  same  time  to  organize  the  Norwich  church  and  unite 
it  more  closely  with  the  London  Ban-owists.  One  Thomas 
Ensner,  who  evidently  had  not  been  chosen  pastor,  had  been 

vnto  him  :  and  did  put  in  place  for  spiritual!  exercises  one  Bradshaw  a 
man  so  openly  and  manifestly  known  of  evil  behaviour,  that  he  was  of 
thai  [sic\  whole  Church  vtterly  refused  to  be  received  as  a  member  vnto 
that  Church.  For  this  his  not  private  but  open  deede  (writeth  M.  Hunt 
[Hunt]  to  this  Pastor)  we  desier  that  Mr.  Studley  may  be  dravv[n]  to 
confes  his  sin,  to  repent,  and  so  amend.  This  was  written  to  the 
Past.[or]  1600.  the  6.  of  the  3.  Mon[th]." 

(From  George  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  p.  205.) 

Johnson  speaks  of  Mr  Hunt  as  pastor  of  the  church  at  Norwich  and 
also  of  that  at  "Chatsham".  My  interpretation  of  these  statements  is 
given  later  in  the  text.  See  "A  discourse",  1603,  p.  205,  text  and  note. 
For  the  suggestion  that  "  Chatsham  "  was  Chattisham,  and  not  Chatham, 
I  am  indebted  to  Mr  Falconer  Madan  of  the  Bodleian  Library. 

Notwithstanding  Mr  Hunt's  removal,  Brownism  apparently  still  con- 
tinued to  be  maintained  in  Chattisham.  In  the  Visitation  Book  of  the 
Archdeaconry  of  Suffolk  for  the  year  1606  (which  I  examined  through  the 
courtesy  of  Mr  L.  G.  Bolingbroke,  now  Registrar  of  the  Diocese  of 
Norwich)  complaint  is  made  against  the  then  Vicar  of  Chattisham,  the 
Rev.  John  Baker,  that  "  he  hath  not  reed  \sic\  all  the  Cannons ",  that  "  he 
doth  impugne  &  speake  against  the  rightes  &  ceremonies  established  in 
the  church  of  England",  that  "he  doth  not  vse  the  prescripte  forme  of 
Common  prayer  but  readeth  psalmes  of  his  owne  chosing  neither  doth 
obserue  all  the  rightes  &  ceremonies  prescribed  in  the  said  Booke",  that 
"  he  hath  administred  the  communion  but  once  since  Christmas  was  xij 
monthes  ",  that  "he  doth  not  vse  the  signe  of  the  crosse  in  baptisme", 
that  "he  weareth  no  surples...",  and  that  "he  doth  neuer  denounce  ex- 
communicate persons,  neither  doth  geue  thankes  for  women  after  Child- 
birth''. Baker  himself  was  not  accused  of  being  a  Brownist  or  Barrowist, 
but  complaint  is  made  directly  against  Elizabeth  Barker,  widow,  that 
"  there  be  often  metinges  at  her  howse  to  conferre  about  religion  and  that 
the  said  Elizabeth  is  a  brownest",  and  on  June  6th,  1606,  the  complaint 
is  registered  against  George  Barker,  who  was  evidently  her  son,  that  "  he 
is  a  bi'ownist  or  sectary...".  Probably  Mr  Baker  had  no  intention  of 
inspiring  his  parishioners  to  become  separatists,  but  nevertheless  his 
influence  certainly  tended  in  this  dii-ection. 


Obscure  Separatist  Congregations  189 

directing  the  activities  of"  the  congregation  before  the  arrival  of 
the  Londoners.  The  presence  of  Barrowists  in  the  city  soon 
came  to  the  knowledge  of  the  authorities,  and  some  of  the 
church  (including  Studley,  Slade,  Knifton,  and  Bowman)  seem 
to  have  been  taken  captive.  During  the  period  of  their 
imprisonment,  Studley,  who  apparently  had  taken  a  dislike  to 
Thomas  Ensner,  in  an  autocratic  way,  which  suggests  that  the 
London  Barrowists  had  already  assumed  oversight  over  the 
Norwich  congregation,  "  put  in  place  [of  Ensner]  for  spirituall 
exercises  one  Bradshaw  a  man  so  openly  and  manifestly  known 
of  evil  behaviour,  that  he  was  of  thai  \sic\  whole  Church  vtterly 
refused  to  be  received  as  a  member  vnto  that  Church  ".  This 
action  of  Studley 's  appears  to  have  made  trouble  at  Norwich. 

Late  in  1589  or  early  in  1590,  it  would  appear,  one  Mr  Hunt 
(whose  Christian  name  we  do  not  at  present  know)  came  to 
Norwich  and  joined  the  Brownist  congregation.  He  had 
been  Vicar  of  Chattisham,  Ipswich,  from  about  May,  1586,  until 
about  December  5,  1589,  and  had  been  deprived  for  Brownism^ 
He  had  evidently  witnessed,  or  at  least  was  thoroughly  con- 
versant with,  the  difficulties  caused  by  Studley,  and  very  likely 
had  become  pastor  of  the  Norwich  Brownists  as  a  substitute  for 
Ensner  and  Bradshaw.  However  this  may  be,  the  troubles 
among  the  local  Brownists  at  that  period  seem  to  have  been  so 

1  I  am  indebted  for  this  information,  probably  given  here  for  the  first 
time,   to   the  kindness    of  the  present  Vicar  of  Chattisham,   Ipswich, 
Rev.  A.  H.  Stevens,  M.A.,  B.Miis.,  who  has  supplied  the  following  memor- 
andum from  the  Parish  Register,  inserted  under  the  date  1586  : — 
"  Mf  Hunt      Memorandum — that  from  the  28^^  day  of  May  1586  until 
Vicar —  April   1590  there  was  no  register  kept  that  can  be  found 
during  which  time  M-  Hunt  was  Vicar  of  Chattisham,  who 
was  deprived  for  Brownisine  whom  lames  Armond  Vicar  of 
Chattisham  succeeded  being  inducted  5-  December  1389." 
This  is  the  only  record  concerning  Mr  Hunt  in  the  Chattisham  Register. 
I  have  extended  one  or  two  abbreviations  in  Mr  Stevens's  text  as  sent 
to  me. 

It  was  probably  Mr  Hunt  who  began  the  Brownist  or  Barrowist 
movement  in  and  about  Ipswich.  At  least  several  of  the  Amsterdam 
Barrowists  before  1617  came  from  Ipswich  or  its  neighbourhood.  See 
"The  Brownists  in  Amsterdam"  in  the  "Transactions"  of  the  Congrega- 
tional Historical  Society  for  September,  1905,  pp.  160-172. 


190  Early  English  Dissenters 

bitter,  that  they  were  long  kept  in  memory,  and  as  late  as  1600, 
Mr  Hunt  wrote  about  them  to  the  exiled  church  in  Amsterdam. 
In  1603  Mr  Hunt  is  spoken  of  by  George  Johnson  as  if  he  was 
still  pastor  of  the  Norwich  Brownists.  At  present  it  is  unknown 
how  long  the  congregation  in  Norwich  existed  after  1603. 

It  is  perhaps  possible  that  this  church  in  Norwich  is  referred 
to  in  1602  as  being  in  Suffolk,  and  as  maintaining  the  opinion 
that  it  was  "  vnlawfull  to  eat  blood ;  and  to  flie  [flee  from 
persecution  into  a  foreign  country]  ".  One  Mr  Woolsey,  then 
prisoner  in  Norwich,  seems  to  have  been  the  chief  advocate  of 
the  former  doctrine,  and  to  have  recommended  its  adoption  in 
the  exiled  English  Church  at  Amsterdam.  He  claimed  that 
Henry  Barrowe  and  his  church  then  at  London  had  written 
letters  to  this  congregation  in  Suffolk  [Norwich  ?]  supporting 
his  views.  The  church  in  Amsterdam,  however,  did  not  pay 
much  attention  to  his  opinions,  and  a  reply  to  him  dated 
"Amsterdam,  Mon.  12.  7.  1602"  was  written  by  "Francis 
lohnson  Pastor  Henry  Ainsworth  Teacher  Daniel  Studley 
Stanshal  Mercer  Elders  ",  "  in  the  name  and  with  consent  of  the 
whole  Church  ".  This  letter  was  first  published  at  London  in 
1657  under  the  title  of  "A  Seasonable  j  TREATISE  |  FOR  | 
THIS  AGE :  I  Occasioned  by  a  Letter  written  by  |  one  Mr 
Woolsey  prisoner  in  Norivich,  to  |  the  then  [1602]-exiled  Church 
at  Amsterdam;  in  |  which  he  endeavours  to  prove  it  unlaw- 1 
ful  to  eat  blood,  things  strangled,  and  things  offered  to  idols,  now 
in  the  times  of  the  Gospel...".  Perhaps  Daniel  Studley  was  in 
part  referring  to  unusual  doctrines  like  these  when  he  spoke  of 
the  congregation  in  Norwich  as  being  "a  simple  people  "^ 

Another  early  separatist  or  Barrowist  congregation  appears 
in  Great  Yarmouth  early  in  the  seventeenth  century,  though 
the  year  of  its  origin  and  the  length  of  its  existence  are  still 
uncertain.  The  first  definite  notice  of  this  company  which  has 
come  to  my  attention  is  dated  July  17,  1630.  On  that  day 
separatists  or  Barrowists  to  the  number  of  twenty-eight  persons 
in  all,  were  resident  in  Great  Yarmouth,  while  two  miles  outside 
the  city  lived  two  other  persons  who  sometimes  frequented  their 

*  George  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  1603,  p.  206. 


Obscure  Separatist  Congregations  191 

meetings.  The  name  of  these  Barrowists  at  Great  Yarmouth 
are  given  in  the  vohime  of  documents.  A  "poore  Mariner" 
named  William  Uring'  [Euring]  seems  to  have  been  the  leader 
of  the  congregation  at  this  time,  and  on  July  17,  1630,  he  was 
"  in  Norwich  Castle  and  comitted  to  the  Goale  in  Yarmouth  ". 
William  Birchall  and  Thomas  Caine,  two  other  members,  were 
then  also  in  Yarmouth  Gaol.  The  rest  appear  at  that  time  to 
have  been  free.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  there  was  some 
connection,  direct  or  indirect,  between  the  Brownists  of  Norwich 
and  of  Great  Yarmouth,  but  the  Independent  or  Congregational 
Church  in  Great  Yarmouth  organized  in  1643  was  evidently  in 
no  way  related  to  this  congregation  of  Barrowists,  or  so-called 
Brownists.  The  Independent  church  was  an  independent 
Puritan  congregation  founded  after  the  ideals  of  Henry  Jacob, 
and  especially  of  Hugh  Peter,  formerly  of  Rotterdam,  and  at 
first  was  composed  mainly  of  members  of  the  independent, 
non-separatist,  Puritan  congregation  at  Rotterdam,  from  which 
they  had  been  dismissed.  As  regards  William  Euring  it  seems 
that  he  has  been  little  noticed  heretofore,  and  that  his  place  of 
activity  has  not  been  known.  He  was  certainly  a  separatist  as 
early  as  1619,  for  in  that  year  he  published  (it  is  thought  through 
the  instrumentality  of  William  Brewster  at  Leyden)  "AN  | 
ANSWER  I  TO  THE  TEN  |  COVNTER  DE-jMANDS  {  PRO- 
POVNDED  BY  jT.  Drakes,  Preacher  of  |  the  Word  at  H.[arwich  ?] 
and  D.[overcourt  ?]  j  in  the  County  of  |  ESSEX  "^  and  the  contents 
of  this  treatise  make  it  probable  that  he  had  been  a  separatist 
for  some  time,  perhaps  even  for  several  years,  before  that  date. 
He  says  that  the  separatists  "  some  good  space  since  "  (that  is 
before  1619)  had  propounded  "7  Demands",  to  which  Drakes 
prepared  "  Ten  Counter-demands  ".     Up  to  this  point  the  con- 

1  Not  "William  Pring"  as  given  by  Dr  John  Waddington  in  the 
second  volume  of  his  "Congregational  History",  1874,  p.  281.  Um'ing 
John  Robinson's  controversy  with  John  Yates  of  Norwich  in  1618  con- 
cerning laymen's  use  of  "  prophecy  ",  William  Euring  seems  to  have  acted 
as  carrier  between  Norwich  and  Leyden.  See  the  author's  "^  Tercen- 
tenary Memorial  New  Facts  Concerning  John  Robinson  Pastor  of  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers",  Oxford  and  London,  1910,  p.  21. 

2  What  appears  to  be  an  unique  copy  of  this  work  is  in  Dr  Williams's 
Library,  London. 


192  Early  English  Dissenters 

troversy  had  evidently  been  conducted  in  manuscript,  not  in 
print  as  Mr  Arber  seems  to  suppose.  Euring  accordingly  cites 
extensively  the  text  of  the  "  Demands "  and  also  of  the 
"  Counter-demands  ".  He  further  makes  it  clear  in  the  follow- 
ing citation,  that  at  this  time  he  was  not  in  England,  but 
probably  in  Holland  : — 

not  onely  I  my  selfe,  but  all  of  v,s,  that  now  are  separated  from  you 
[in  the  Church  of  England],  would  much  more  willingly  and  gladly 
returne  againe  and  labor  to  plant  our  selues  againe  in  the  meanest 
parte  of  England,  to  inioy  peace  with  holinesse  and  to  follow  the 
truth  in  loue  among  our  kindred  and  friends  in  our  owne  natiue 
cuntry,  then  either  to  continue  where  now  many  of  vs  as  yet  Hue, 
or  to  plant  our  selues  in  Virginia  or  in  any  other  country  in  the 
world,  vppon  any  conditions,  or  hope  of  any  thing  in  this  lyfe 
whatsoeuer'. 

From  Peter  Fairlambe's  "  Recantation  of  a  Brownist ", 
published  in  1606,  it  is  made  apparent  that  Brownists  or 
Barrowists  early  disturbed  the  religious  peace  of  "  the  English 
Marchants  in  Barbary ".  Fairlambe  was  in  that  country  in 
October,  1599,  and  even  before  his  arrival,  he  says,  Brownists  or 
Barrowists  were  there.  Having  been  banished  from  England 
for  maintaining  Brownist  opinions  which  he  had  long  held,  he 
also  sought  here  to  persuade  others  to  accept  his  views.  How- 
ever, he  afterwards  gave  them  up,  returned  to  London,  and  was 
received  again  into  the  Church  of  England  by  Richard  Bancroft, 
who  had  just  been  made  Bishop  of  London.  Soon  after  Fair- 
lambe went  back  to  Barbary  to  undo  the  work  he  had  formerly 
furthered.  In  this  he  met  with  success  as  he  claims,  and  finally 
returned  again  to  his  native  land.  From  this  bare  account  we 
may  safely  believe  that  there  were  not  many  Brownists  in 
Barbary  before  1606,  surely  not  enough  for  an  organized  church, 
but  it  is  nevertheless  interesting  to  see  how  rapidly  and  how 
widely  separatist  views  spread  even  at  that  early  period. 

Among  the  Barrowists  of  this  time  John  Wilkinson  and  his 
congregation  at  Colchester  should  especially  be  mentioned,  for 
he  long  maintained  his  influence,  and  yet  did  not  entirely  agree 
with  the  orthodox  Barrowists.  Probably  the  earliest  reference 
to  him  now  known  is  contained  in  a  deposition  of  Christopher 

'  P.  36. 


Obscure  Se2Xiratist  Congregations  193 

Diggins  made  in  April,  1593,  where  he  says  that  he  had  seen 
"one  of  Barowes  his  bookes  in  the  handes  of  one  lohn 
wilkenson  "^  and  we  may  infer  that  from  about  this  time  dates 
Wilkinson's  interest  in  separatism.  We  next  find  further  refer- 
ence to  him  in  a  letter  of  "Mat.  Savnders  and  Cvth.  Hvtten"-, 
written  on  July  8, 1611,  where  the  statement  occurs  that  "lohn 
Wilkinson  and  his  disciples  will  haue  Apostles".  In  other  words, 
his  church  was  of  the  Seeker  type.  In  1613  Wilkinson  was  "a 
Prisoner  in  Colchester, /or  the  Patience  and  Faith  of  the  Saints". 
During  this  imprisonment  he  wrote  "  A  reproof  of  some  things 
written  by  John  Morton  [Murtoii],  and  others  of  his  Company 
and  followers,  to  prove  That  Infants  are  not  in  the  state  of 
Condemnation ;  And  that  therfore  they  are  not  to  be  Baptised  ". 
After  Wilkinson's  death  this  manuscript  seems  to  have  been 
entrusted  "  for  the  publicke  good  "  to  the  care  of  one  William 
Arthurbury,  who  "  considering  how  needfull  it  would  be  to  be 
published  rather  than  obscured  "  had  it  printed  before  Nov.  17, 
1646,  under  the  title,  "THE  |  SEALED  |  FOVNTAINE  |  opened 
to  the  Faith-  [  full,  and  their  Seed.  |  OR,  |  A  short  Treatise,  shewing, 
that  I  some  Infants  are  in  the  state  of  |  Grace,  and  capable  of  the 
seales,  \  and  others  not.  |  Being  the  chief  point,  wherein  the  | 
Separatists  doe  blame  the  |  Anabaptists.  |  By  John  Wilkinson, 
Prisoner  \  at  Colchester,  against  John  Morton  |  Prisoner  at 
London"  ["Nou:  17  1646"].  This  work  is  to-day  almost 
entirely  lacking  in  interest  except  for  its  scarcity. 

There  are  apparently  but  few  references  to  John  Wilkinson 
in  contemporaneous  English  literature.  One  of  these  is  in  John 
Murton's  "  A  Discription  ",  1620,  where  he  says : — 

some  of  the  Brotvnists  acknowledging  it  lawful!  for  any  Disciple,  to 
Preach  &  conuert,  but  not  Baptise :  though  others  of  them  [From 
the  margin:  "  lo.  Wilk.(inson)  &  his  followers"]  holde;  that 
Disciples  of  Christ  though  not  in  office  of  Pastor  or  Elder  may 
conuert  and  Baptise  also,  vpon  which  they  haue  bene  at  deadly 
jarres  these  many  yeares^. 

1  Harleian  MS.  6848,  fol.  32  recto. 

2  In  "The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists",  by 
Christopher  Lawne  and  three  others,  1612,  p.  55. 

3  P.  162. 

B.  13 


194  Early  English  Dissenters 

From  this  statement  one  might  infer  that  Wilkinson  was 
still  alive  in  1620,  but  from  it  one  would  hardly  suspect  that  he 
was  a  Seeker.  Nevertheless,  there  is  a  persistent  recurrence  of 
the  assertion  that  he  held  the  specially  characteristic  opinion 
of  the  Seekers  concerning  the  coming  of  new  Apostles  or 
Prophets,  and  Edmond  Jessop  in  1623  even  seems  to  claim  that 
he  regarded  himself  as  one  of  these  honoured  messengers.  He 
was  not,  of  course,  an  Arian  like  Wightman  or  Sayer.  Jessop 
suggests  further  that  Wilkinson  died  before  1623\ 

The  religious  unrest  of  the  times  succeeding  the  execution 
of  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  those 
who  left  the  Church  of  England  had  great  difficulty  in  agreeing 
with  one  another  in  their  new  beliefs.  In  foreign  countries, 
whither  Englishmen  had  gone  for  purposes  of  business,  this 
unrest  is  specially  manifest.  Such  travellers  certainly  did  not 
all  become  Brownists  or  Barrowists,  but  in  the  atmosphere  of 
greater  freedom  they  undoubtedly  became  more  liberal  than 
would  have  been  the  case,  had  they  remained  in  England. 

One  of  the  reputed  early  converts  to  Barrowism  was 
Henoch  Clapham,  or,  in  "  Northbrittishe  forme  ",  "  Cleypam  ". 
As  he  did  not  adhere,  however,  to  the  opinions  which  he  was 
perhaps  erroneously  supposed  to  have  adopted,  not  much 
attention  has  been  bestowed  upon  him.  Furthermore,  Clapham 's 
writings  are  all  scarce,  but  in  his  various  works  he  has  left  a 
good  deal  of  biographical  material  which  it  may  be  profitable  to 
examine.  With  regard  to  his  early  life  we  learn  that  about 
1585  he  gave  up  "  the  vayne  exercise  of  Poetrie"  and  began  to 
devote  himself  "(by  Gods  goodnes)  to  sad  and  sober  studies;  and 
so,  about  som  14.  yeares  since  [i.e.,  about  1591]",  he  says,  "cary- 
ing  letters  of  commendation  from  Cambridge  to  ["  Wickam  "^] 
the  Bishop  of  Lincolne  then  at  his  Mannour  of  Bugden,  I  of  him 

*  See  Jessop's  "A  Discovery  of  the  Errors  of  the  English  Anabaptists", 
London,  1623,  p.  77  :  "There  was  also  one  lohn  Wilkinson,  another  ancient 
stout  Separatist,  who  with  diners  that  followed  him,  held  the  same  [opinion] 
likewise  [viz.,  that  he  was  a  new  specially  called  apostle],  drawing  it  from 
the  same  ground,  as  a  necessary  consequence  thereof,  who  also  came  to 
naught." 

2  "Antidoton",  London,  IGOO,  p.  C. 


Obscure  Separatist  Congregations  195 

was  ordained  Presbyter  (and  that  in  his  Librarie  without 
Chappel-ceremonie)  Doctor  lermine  the  Poser,  and  the  Chappel- 
clarke  onlie  standing  by,  , . . ". 

"  To  the  terme  Clercke.  I  am  neither  an  Amen-clercke  nor 
a  Pen-clarke,  and  therefore  I  conceaue  he  meaneth  thereby  a 
Glergie-man  as  the  word  Clericus  is  ecclesiastically  vsed.  Such 
a  one  indeed  I  was  by  the  former  Ordination,  but  Clericus  sine 
titulo,  such  a  one  as  was  vntitled  to  any  particular  place  (but  as 
a  Sheepheard  at  randome  to  helpe  where  I  could)  ..."^ 

For  two  years  in  Lancashire  he  now  "  publikely  ministred  ", 
that  is,  during  1591  and  1592,  but  as  he  loved  his  liberty  and 
yet  did  not  like,  as  he  says,  to  "  practise  contrarie  to  my  [his] 
perswasion,  (as  many  deceitfully  haue  done) ",  he  was  forced  to 
leave  England.  Previously,  however,  I  believe  he  may  have 
been  imprisoned  in  the  Clink  with  Francis  Johnson  and  other 
Barrowists  about  1592/93^.  Certainly  he  came  into  close  touch 
with  them  in  some  way  about  that  time,  though  he  does  not 
seem  to  consider  himself  ever  to  have  been  one  of  their  number. 
"  First  into  the  Low-countries  I  went ",  he  says,  "  Afterwards 
into  Scotland.  After  that  againe  into  the  Low-countries.  Then 
again  into  Scotland :  And  once  againe  into  the  Low-countries. 
Then  again  into  Scotland:  And  once  againe  into  Netherland, 
&c.  Sometimes  haled  by  this  faction,  sometimes  pulled  by  that 
faction... I  kept  me  euer  fast  vnto  the  maine  point,  that  is,  vnto 
the  foundation  of  the  Gospell  "^  The  last  time  he  was  in 
Holland  was  evidently  in  1597  and  1598,  when  we  suddenly  find 
him  to  be  the  minister  of  what  he  calls  "  that  poore  English 


'  "Doctor  ANDROS  ]  His  Prosopopeia  an- 1  swered,...",  1605,  p.  4. 

2  In  his  "A  Chronological  Discourse",  London,  1609,  [p.  36,]  Clapham 
has  these  suggestive  words  touching  this  point:  ^'- Franc.  loknson  (being 
aduised  by  one  [Clapham  ?]  that  talked  with  him  thereabouts  in  the 
Clinke  at  London)  did  presse  the  vse  of  our  singing  Psalmes  (neglected 
before  of  his  people  for  Apochrypha ;)..."  The  woi-d  "our"  may  suggest 
that  Clapham  with  other  Puritans  was  imprisoned  with  the  Barrowists,  in 
which  case  it  may  have  been  advisable  to  hold  their  religious  exercises 
together. 

3  "Antidoton",  p.  6. 

13—2 


196  Early  English  Disseyiters 

Congregation,  in  Amstelredam  "^  In  another  work  of  his 
published  at  Amsterdam  in  1598,  entitled  "  THE  SYN,  | 
AGAINST  THE  HOLY  |  GHOSTE :...",  he  mentions  the 
names  of  some  of  his  congi-egation  whom  he  styles  "  his  faithfull 
Brethren  (a  poore  Remnant  of  the  ever  visible  Catholike  and 
Apostolicke  Church)  Abraham  Crotendine,  lohn  Ioope^  Hugh 
Armourer,  Christopher  Symkins,  Thomas  Farrat^  [?Farrar], 
Abraham  Wakefeild  &c."'*  In  another  place  in  the  same  work' 
he  speaks  of  the  "  funerals "  of  his  "  excellent  frend  Mistris 
Anne  Ogle  "  ;  and  of  "  his  beloued  Tho.  whicks  and  Ri.  Carter  ", 
whom  he  does  not  expect  to  see  again.  It  should  be  kept  in 
mind  that  this  church  was  not  separatist,  as  will  appear  more 
clearly  in  the  next  paragraph. 

Of  the  persons  here  named  it  is  interesting  to  note  that 
Christopher  Symkins  had  been  a  loyal  member  of  Greenwood's 
congregation  after  October,  1591;  that  early  in  March,  1592/93, 
he  was  taken  captive  "  in  the  wood  by  Islington  " ;  and  that  he 
was  examined  on  April  5, 1593,  when  he  refused  "  to  come  to  his 
parishe  Churche  ",  and  said  he  was  "  ioyned  to  their  [Barrowist] 
congregacion  from  whence    he  will    not   departe  "*.     Symkins 

1  "THEOLOGICAL  AXIOMS  |  OR  CONCLVSIONS  :  |  ...",  1597, 
title-page. 

2  In  1599,  after  Clapham's  departure  from  Amsterdam,  John  Joope 
published  a  single  chapter  taken  from  an  extended  MS.  of  26  chapters 
■written  by  Clapham.  This  independent  publication  Joope  entitled  "  The 
Discription  of  a  trve  visible  Christian  ",  etc. 

3  Thomas  Farrat  (not  Farrar)  is  undoubtedly  here  intended.  The 
name  is  elsewhere  given  as  Thomas  Farret.  He  is  described  in  the  spring 
of  1593  as  a  "servant  to  William  Greene  of  Aldersgate  streete".  Pre- 
viously he  had  attended  meetings  of  the  London  Brownists  and  had  been 
taken  prisoner.  However,  as  he  showed  himself  willing  to  conform,  ho 
was  soon  released  on  bail.  Later  he  evidently  went  over  to  Holland  and 
may  have  joined  the  Barrowists  there.  In  that  case  he  must  have  become 
discontented  and  have  taken  part  in  the  schism  in  which  Christopher 
Symkins  and  others  were  concerned,  and  thus,  like  him,  is  to  be  found 
among  Clapham's  little  company  in  1598. 

•»  [P.  2].  6  [P.  21]. 

*>  See  Symkins'  deposition  made  on  April  5,  1593,  in  the  volume  of 
documents. 


Obscure  Sej^aratist  Congregations  197 

probably  accompanied  the  other  members  of  the  church  to 
Holland  in  1593  and  remained  satisfied  for  a  time,  but  he  seems 
to  have  been  one  of  the  "  many  others  ",  mentioned  by  Francis 
Johnson,  who  after  "  divers  "  of  the  congregation  had  fallen  into 
the  heresies  of  the  Anabaptists  and  been  excommunicated,  "fell 
into  a  schisme  from  the  rest "  (led  perhaps  by  Henoch  Clapham , 
who  evidently  did  not  favour  separatism),  and  continuing  therein 
were  "cast  out".  Johnson  speaks  of  "C[hristopher?]  <S^.[ymkins ?] 
one  of  the  schismed  "  as  writing  to  him,  and  says  he  understood 
that  not  half  of  the  congregation  fell  into  this  schism,  and  that 
divers  repented  and  returned  before  excommunication  was  pro- 
nounced, while  others  did  so  later'.  Symkins,  however,  evidently 
did  not  return,  and  accordingly  in  1597  and  1598,  or  1598  and 
1599,  we  find  him  one  of  a  little  group  of  men  "(a  poore  Remnant 
of  the  ever  visible  Catholike  and  Apostolike  Church)  "  under 
the  leadership  of  Clapham  at  Amsterdam,  In  this  way  we  may 
perhaps  see  how  Clapham  came  to  be  looked  upon  as  an  apostate*, 
for  though  apparently  not  one  himself  in  reality,  he  was  able  to 
draw  others  into  a  prolonged  apostacy,  which  he,  no  doubt, 
thought  would  prove  their  best  means  of  finding  the  true 
Church. 

Whether  Clapham  had  been  in  Middleburg  before  he  came 
to  Amsterdam  is  difficult  to  say,  but  he  states  that  "  our 
Englishc  [Puritan]  teachers  at  Midlcburgh "  wrote  letters  to 
the  preachers  in  Scotland,  whither  he  had  gone  for  a  time, 

'  Ibid.,  pp.  numbered  64  and  63. 

2  There  were  evidently  three  persons  whom  the  early  Brownists  looked 
upon  with  special  disap2)roval  as  apostates.  Among  these  three  Clapham 
was  included.  This  is  made  evident  in  the  following  citation  from  John 
Smyth's  "Paralleled,  Censvres,  Observations",  1609,  p.  5: — 
"I  do  therfor  Proclame  you  [Richard  Bernard]  vnto  the  whole  land  to  be 
one  of  the  most  fearful  Apostates  of  the  whole  nation  that  excepting, 
VVhyte,  &  Clapham,  you  have  no  Superior  nor  equal  that  I  know  or 
remember,  who  have  thus  often  confessed  &  witnessed  much  truth,  &  now 
not  only  have  fallen  from  it,..." 

Probably  the  Brownists  had  hoped  too  much  of  Bernard  and  Clapham, 
and  were  bitterly  disappointed  that  neither  of  them  finally  advanced  to 
the  full  separatist  position.  Thomas  White  seems  really  to  have  espoused 
separatism  for  a  time. 


198  Early  English  Dissenters 

telling  them  that  he  "  was  a  Brownist  etc.",  in  order,  as  he 
claims,  "  to  lessen  their  loues  there  to  me  [him]  and  my  [his] 
Ijrethren".  Then  he  adds:  "Som  preachers  beleiuing  yt:  They 
insinuate  it  in  their  pulpits.  I  wished  therupon  a  tryall  to  be 
taken  of  my  faith.  A  Convocation  was  had  Clapham  cold  not 
be  conuicted  neither  of  heresie  nor  errour"^  In  another  place 
he  says  further :  "  Som  of  yow  [Puritans]  sent  word  into 
Scotland  /  that  I  fell  from  your  Sect  /  twise  to  the  Bishops  twise 
to  the  Brownists  (4.  lies  at  a  clap)..."^  Probably,  therefore,  he 
was  never  entirely  converted  to  Brownist  views. 

However,  Clapham  was  certainly  not  thoroughly  orthodox, 
and  he  must  have  been  a  curious  character.  Under  these 
circumstances,  accordingly,  it  seems  strange  that  so  many  Avorks 
of  his  were  printed,  and  especially  as  he  had  little  of  real  im- 
portance to  say.  His  only  strong  point  was  his  independent 
position,  for  he  undoubtedly  differed  somewhat  from  the  ordinary 
Anglicans,  Puritans,  and  Brownists.  In  fact,  there  were  those 
who  feared  "  that  Cl.[apham]  would  bring  people  to  all  the  cor- 
ruptions of  the  English  Church,  and  finally  to  Homes  church"^. 

Clapham  thus  describes  the  religious  unrest  of  the  period  in 
which  he  lived^ : — 

REformists  in  England  caried  of  erst  with  true  zeale  for  reparing 
the  walls  of  lerushalem,  the  praise  of  the  whole  earth  :  they 
in  the  heat  of  their  labour  ouer-caried  in  som  speach  (as,  Such  «& 
such  ecclesiasticall  functions,  ordinatious  [ordinations],  administra- 
tions &c.  they  are  merely  Antichristian,  badges  of  the  beast)  others 
theyr  zealous  hearers  herevpon  (and  in  the  fore-front  of  such, 
Mr  Rob.  Browne)  taking  such  assertions  for  sound  Theological! 
axioms,  do  conclude  thus :  Then  not  only  that,  but  all  tlovving  from 
that,  it  must  also  be  meerly  Antichristian :...Wherevpon  fearing 
the  iudgment  denounced  against  the  Beast  his  people  Revel.  14. 
9.  10.  11.  they  seperate  not  only  from  visible  euell,  but  also  from 
visible  good)  as  all  Anti- christian.  Having  thus  confusedlie  sepe- 
rated  from  Confusion,  it  reniaines  they  begin  all  anewe,  wherevnto 
Ministers  must  be  no  ministers  vntill  they  have  a  newe  Ordination 
from  such  separists, ...wherevpon  (which  Donatus  durst  not  attempt, 
nor  yet  Rob.  Br.[owne])   Laymen... must  Lay  on   hands,... Others 

1  "Theological  Axioms",  p.  iii.  ^  /ftjo^,  [p.  25.] 

3  "An  Epistle  Discovrsing  vpon  the  present  Pestilence.... 'R&^vmi&d 
with  some  Additions",  London,  1603,  4°,  p.  iii. 

*  "The  Syn,  against  the  Holy  Ghoste",  Amsterdam,  1598  [p.  2]. 


Obscure  SejKct'atist  Coiu/regations  199 

go  on  furder  saing,  Is  it  possible  to  receive  laufull  baptisme, . . .  f rom 
the  Ministers  and  apostacie  of  Anti-christ,...and  so  seeke  out  newe 
baptisme,... reiecting  frely  and  voluntarily  the  former:... 
The  not  being  Cathechized  in  this  one  poore  begining  of  Christ,  it 
hath  caused  Many  teachers  to  lay  false  grounds,  whereyn  [whereon  1] 
others  buildinge,  there  is  no  end  of  wandring.  Some  Ronninge  [?] 
not  onlie  into  Mr  Br.[ownes]  first  course,  but  also  further  and  worse 
then  that  further  [sic]  :  yea  so  far,  as  diuerse  I  feare  haue  com- 
mitted the  horrible  syn  against  the  holy  Ghost,  Heb.  6.  and  10. 
That  I  labour  to  proue  in  the  sequell,  which  I  incommend  [sic]  vnto 
your  Brotherhood  for  a  signe  to  the  Catholike  Church  of  my  soules 
syncerity : . . . 

Clapham  has  a  rambling  and  sometimes  figurative  style, 
which  in  many  places  tends  to  obscure  his  meaning,  as,  for 
instance,  in  the  following  passage^ : — 

MAny  Spirits  conceiued  in  the  Canicular  days  /  hatcht  in  the 
wayning  of  the  Moone  /  \Tireasonable  men  and  as  yet  repro- 
bate to  the  faith  /  gone  out  from  araonge  vs  /  as  being  neuer  truly 
of  vs  /  They  abroade  in  Englande  and  elsewhere  /  (as  Hollands 
Nightingals  /  I  meane  frogs)  go  croaking  abroade  /  to  the  diffama- 
tion  of  all  such  as  professe  Christ  in  syncei'ity. 

Some  time  after  1598  Clapham  journeyed  to  England,  where 
his  various  publications  had  preceded  him.  He  Avas  not  warmly 
welcomed,  and  some  Puritan  preachers  had  evidently  given 
instructions  that  their  followers  should  not  read  his  books, 
confer  with  him,  or  hear  him  preachy  Perhaps  it  was  some  of 
these  ministers,  who  in  order  to  get  rid  of  his  presence  "  com- 
playned  "  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  "  that  he  preached  a  doctrine 
...past  the  boundes  of  their  knowledge "^  namely,  that  the 
plague  was  not  infectious,  and  that"  All  that  dyed  of  the  plague 
luere  damned,  as  dying  ivithoid  faith  "*. 

For  teaching  such  doctrine  Clapham  was  committed  to 
prison.  Thirty-four  weeks  after  his  first  commitment  he 
preached  against  the  report  that  had  been  made  of  his  opinions, 
and  on  November  14,  1603,  at  the  close  of  his  sermon,  he  "was 

*  "  Theological  Axioms  ",  p.  iii. 

'■^  "An  Epistle  Discovrsing  vpon  the  present  Pestilence.,.. 'Re^nnioA 
with  some  Additions",  London,  1603,  4°,  p.  iii. 

3  "  Henoch  Clapham  His  Demaimdes  and  Answeres  touching  the  Pesti- 
lence", 1604,  p.  ii. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  iii. 


200  Early  English  Dissenters 

conveyed  to  the  Clink  prison  "  for  eleven  weeks,  and  after  that 
was  sent  to  the  Gatehouse,  where  his  release  continued  to  be 
delayed.  Finally,  in  1605  he  wrote  his  "  Doctor  ANDROS  |  His 
Prosopopeia  an-  j  swered,  and  necessarily  directed  |  to  his 
Maiestie,...".  On  the  title-page  he  still  speaks  of  himself  as 
"Prisoner  in  the  Gatehouse  at  Westminster,  adioyning  London". 
Later,  however,  he  was  freed,  and  in  October,  1607,  is  said  to 
have  been  made  Vicar  of  Northbourne  in  Kent,  a  position  which 
he  held  until  his  death  in  1614\  After  1605  two  or  three  new 
works  by  Clapham  appeared,  and  before  that  time  he  had 
published  at  least  fifteen  books,  as  may  be  seen  in  a  list  printed 
on  the  back  of  the  last  leaf  of  his  "  Doctor  ANDROS  ",  1605,— a 
remarkable  record  for  any  man  at  that  period. 

We  may  here  also  mention  some  of  those  less  known  early 
Brownists  who  renounced  their  opinions,  but  who  instead  of 
returning  to  the  Church  of  England,  wandered  still  further 
away,  and  presumably  sought  to  make  converts  to  their 
particular  views.  Among  them  should  be  included  those 
"  wandering  brethren,  (wandering  starres)  "  who,  even  before 
1603,  according  to  George  Johnson^,  went  "  hither  and  thither/ 
to  and  from  England  abiding  in  no  certaine  place".  These  were 
John  Beacham,  William  Shepheard',  John  Nicholas"*,  Richard 
Parish  David  Bristoe*',  and  William  Houlder^  A  few  yeai-s 
later,  we  hear  of  Thomas  Lemar*  as  the  inventor  of  "The 
Monster  of  Lemarisme  "  "  with  seuen  heads  ",  composed,  as  was 

1  Arber's  "Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  London,  1897,  p.  99. 

2  "A  discourse",  p.  32. 

3  Shepheard  was  present  at  the  organization  of  the  Johnson  congrega- 
tion in  September,  1592. 

*  John  Nicholas  was  also  present  at  the  church  organization  in  Sep- 
tember, 1592. 

s  Paris  had  died  before  Dec.  16,  1606  (New  Style),  and  on  that  date 
his  widow  married  Thomas  Gillis  of  Hampton  at  Amsterdam. 

^  Bristoe  was  present  at  the  organization  of  the  Johnson  church  in 
September,  1592. 

''  Houlder,  or  Holder,  had  died  before  January  28,  1606  (New  Style), 
and  on  that  date  his  widow  married  Eichard  Ardivey  at  Amsterdam. 

®  Lemar,  or  Le  Mare,  was  one  of  the  London  Barrowists  whose  names 
appear  in  the  lists  of  1590. 


Obscure  Separatist  Co7igregations  201 

claimed,  of  doctrines  drawn  from  practically  all  religions  then 
known ;  of  John  Hancock,  who  invented  se-separatism,  or 
separatism  by  one's  self;  and  of  Leonard  Pidder^  Henry 
Martin ^  and  others  with  them,  who  had  become  Anabaptists. 
Though  there  was  not  much  opportunity  for  the  unimpeded 
development  of  separatism  in  England  during  the  first  forty 
years  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  although  we  know  so 
little  about  the  separatist  movements  of  this  early  period,  we 
have  nevertheless  just  evidence  enough  to  convince  us  that 
Brownism  or  Barrowism  was  being  taught  in  many  quarters  of 
England  during  all  these  years.  London,  of  course,  always 
furnished  its  quota  of  separatists,  and  in  1621,  as  is  well  known, 
a  congregation  was  "  constituted  "  there  "  &  carried  on  by  one 
M""  Hubbert  ",  or  Hubbard,  who  having  renounced  his  ordination 
in  the  Church  of  England,  "  took  his  Ministry  from  this  Church, 
&  with  them  went  into  Ireland,  &  there  died".  The  congrega- 
tion was  evidently  organized  by  a  League  and  Covenant  entered 
into  by  the  members  one  with  another,  and  at  first  may  not 
have  been  strictly  separatist.  The  church  "returned  into 
England,  &  kept  close  their  Communion  here  about  London  ", 
where  Thomas  Hancock,  an  unordained  member,  preached  to 
them  for  some  months.  Afterwards  John  Canne  was  chosen 
pastor,  and  he  remained  with  the  church  until  he  went  to 
Amsterdam.  Samuel  Howe,  who  had  been  a  member  of  John 
Lathrop's  independent  Puritan  church,  was  next  ordained  their 
pastor,  and  served  the  congregation  in  this  capacity  for  seven 
years.  During  the  period  of  his  ministry  the  church  was 
"much  harassed  up  &  down  in  Fields  &  Woods".  Howe  was 
excommunicated  by  the  Church  of  England,  and  seems  to  have 
died  about  1634  or  1635.  About  1641,  one  "Stephen  More,  a 
gifted  Brother",  who  had  been  a  deacon,  was  elected  pastor. 
Up  to  this  time,  of  course,  the  congregation  had  not  manifested 
any  Anabaptist  tendencies.  The  account  of  this  church  pre- 
served in  "Numb:  23  "  of  the  Gould  Manuscript  (the  text  of 

1  Leonard  Pidder,  or  Pedder,  was  a  prisoner  for  Barrowism  in  the 
spring  of  1593. 

2  Henry  Martin  was  evidently  a  Barrowist  before  Oct.  8,  1587,  and 
was  taken  prisoner  on  that  date. 


202  Early  E7iglish  Dissenter's 

which  is  given  in  the  vohime  of  documents),  and  supposed  to 
have  been  originally  written  by  "old  M""  Webb",  carries  the 
history  of  the  congregation  down  to  1705  when  by  agreement  it 
was  dissolved. 

At  Gainsborough,  or  in  that  neighbourhood,  about  the  years 
1625-1629  there  was  evidently  some  Brownist  or  Barrowist 
interest,  though  perhaps  no  congregation.  Hanserd  Knollys 
says  that  while  he  taught  in  the  "  Free-School "  of  that  village, 
he  was  told  "  of  one  called  a  Brownist,  who  used  to  pray  and 
expound  the  Scriptures  in  his  Family,  whom  I  [he]  went  some- 
times to  hear,  and  with  whom  I  [he]  had  Conference  and  very 
good  Counsel "  ^ 

After  the  death  of  Henry  Ainsworth  and  of  John  Robinson 
at  least  one  of  their  followers  (Thomas  Brewer)  returned  to 
England  and  remained  there.  About  this  time  (1626)  we  begin 
to  hear  of  the  Brownists  in  Kent.  Among  them  we  find  Brewer 
and  one  Turner.  The  chief  strongholds  seem  to  have  been  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Ashford  and  Maidstone.  Turner  was  a 
candle-maker,  or  chandler,  of  Sutton  Valence.  Concerning  the 
Kentish  Brownists  Mr  Arber  has  published  the  following 
interesting  document^: — 

JAMES  MARTIN'S  DETECTION  OF  BROWNISTS  IN  KENT. 
SUNDAY,  17/27  SEPTEMBER  1626. 

A  Detection  of  certain  dangerous  Puritans  and   Brownists 
in  Kent. 

1.  Thomas  Brewer,  Gentleman,  who  writ  a  book^  containing 
about  half  a  quire  of  paper ;  wherein  he  prophesies  the  destruction 
of  England  within  three  years,  by  two  Kings :  one  from  the  North, 
another  from  the  South. 


1  "The  Life  and  Death  of... Mr.  Hanserd  Knollys",  London,  1692,  p.  5. 

2  "The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  1897,  pp.  246-47.  Dr  B.  Evans 
("The  Early  English  Baptists",  Vol.  ii.,  London,  1864,  pp.  55-57)  mentions 
Brewer,  and  on  page  55  quotes  a  reference  to  him  as  having  been  in  1626 
"A  zealous  minister  of  the  Baptist  persuasion"  !  I  make  some  comment 
on  Dr  Evans'  account  of  Brewer  in  Chapter  xi. 

3  At  this  point  I  have  omitted  a  few  words  within  square  brackets 
and  a  comma  probably  inserted  by  Mr  Arber. 


Obscure  Sejyaratist  Congregations  203 

The  said  Brewer  coming,  not  long  since,  from  Amsterdam, 
where  he  became  a  perfect  Brownist ;  and  being  a  man  of  good 
estate,  is  the  general  patron  of  the  Kentish  Brownists ;  who,  by  his 
means,  daily  and  dangerously  increase. 

He,  the  said  Brewer,  hath  printed  a  most  pestilent  book  beyond 
the  seas :  wherein  he  affirmeth.  That  King  James  would  be  the  ruin 
of  Religion.  To  the  like  purpose,  he  published  a  book  or  two  more : 
which  David  Pareus,  at  Neustadt,  shewed  to  a  Knight,  who  told 
me  of  it. 

2.  One  Turner,  a  candle-maker  or  chandler,  of  Sutton  Valence 
in  Kent,  preaches  in  houses,  barns,  and  woods,  That  the  Church  of 
England  is  the  Whore  of  Babylon,  and  the  Synagogue  of  Satan,  «fec. 
He  hath  many  followers  :  and  is  maintained  principally  by  the  said 
Thomas  Brewer  ;  whose  Chaplain  he  seems  to  be. 

3  and  4.  One  Winock  and  [one]  Crumpe  at  Maidstone,  both 
rich  men,  as  far  as  in  them  lies,  maintain  these  Sectaries. 

Witnesses  of  the  Premisses  are 

Sir  P.  H.;  Knight. 

Master  Barrell,  Preacher  of  Maidstone. 

Master  Simondson,  Schoolmaster  of  Maidstone,  and 

Master  Fisher,  of  Maidstone. 

With  many  more. 

Testified  by  them,  September  16  and  17,  1626. 

James  Martin,  M.A. 

S.  P.  Dom.  Ch.  I.,  Vol.  35,  No.  110. 

Brewer  was  imprisoned  for  over  fourteen  years,  and  lived 
only  about  a  month  after  his  release.  He  is  said  to  have 
written  "  many  excellent  manuscripts  ".  A  posthumous  work 
by  him  was  published  at  London  in  1656,  entitled  "Gospel 
Public  Worship",  &c.^ 

The  number  of  separatists  in  London  had  considerably 
increased  by  1631,  for  on  June  11  of  that  year  the  Bishop  of 
Exeter  wrote  the  following  plaintive  words  to  the  Bishop  of 
London'' : — 

I  was  bold  the  last  week  to  giue  your  Lordship  informacion  of  a 
busye,  and  ignorant  schismatick  lurking  in  London,  since  which 
tyme  I  hears  (,  to  my  greife)  that  there  are  eleuen  seuerall  congre- 

1  "  The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  p.  247. 

2  S.P.,  Dom.,  Charles  I,  Vol.  193  (69). 


204  Eai'ly  English  Disseyiters 

gacions  (as  they  call  them)  of  Separatistes  about  the  city  ;  furnished 
with  their  ydly-pretended  pastors,  who  meet  together  in  Brewhouses, 
and  such  other  meet  places  of  resort,  euery  Sunday;... 

This  statement  evidently  had  its  desired  effect,  for  in  the 
following  year  various  separatist,  as  well  as  independent 
Puritan,  meetings  in  London  were  surprised,  and  some  of  those 
who  attended  them  were  taken  to  prison.  Among  those  thus 
captured  were  certain  persons  who  were  discovered,  as  reported, 
"  about  Christes  Church  in  London  ",  and  who  appeared  before 
the  Court  of  High  Commission  on  June  14,  1632.  Of  this 
number  were  John  Cooke,  James  and  Margery  Cleaver,  John 
Japworth,  and  Anne  — .  "  One  [of  them]  was  a  yong  girl." 
They  were  sent  to  several  prisons  two  by  two\ 

A  congregation  of  Brownists  or  Barrowists  was  also  taken 
"  at  a  Conventicle  in  a  wood  neare  Newington  in  Surrey  ",  on 
Sunday  between  June  7  and  14,  1632.  Those  who  were  cap- 
tured and  brought  before  the  Court  of  High  Commission  on 
June  14,  1632,  were  one  "Rawlins,  Harvy,  Arthur  Goslin, 
Rowland,  Robert  Bye,  lohn  Smith,  &  others",  also  Andrew 
Sherle^. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  Archbishop  Laud  had  done  so  much 
to  repress  the  separatists,  their  congregations  in  and  around 
London  about  1641  appear  to  have  been  fairly  numerous.  One 
of  these  was  discovered  by  the  authorities  in  the  afternoon  of 
Sunday,  Jan.  13  [?],  1640/41.  The  company  were  taken  "in 
the  howse  of  Richard  Sturges  where,  they  saied.  They  mett  to 
teach  and  edifie  one  an  other,  in  Christ".  The  capture  was 
made  "  by  the  Constables  and  Church  wardens  of  S''  Saviours  ", 
and  evidently  on  Jan.  16,  1640/41,  the  prisoners  were  brought 
before  Sir  John  Lenthall.  Those  taken  were  Edmond  "Chillen- 
don",  Nicholas  Tyne,  John  Webb,  Richard  Sturges,  Thomas 
Gunn,  John  Ellis,  "with  at  least  Three  score  people  more"^ 

During  the  year  1640,  such  separatists  as  Edward  Barber, 

1  Rawl.  MS.  A.  128  in  the  Bodleian  Library. 

2  Ibid. 

3  See  a  paper  in  the  Library  of  the  House  of  Lords,  calendared  under 
the  date  Jan.  16  1640/41. 


Obscure  Seimratist  Congregations  205 

Mark  Whitelock^  Enock  Howat^  Thomas  Lambe  and  Francis 
Lee'  appeared  before  the  Court  of  High  Commission.  Lambe 
and  Lee  were  from  Colchester  in  Essex,  a  Brownist  stronghold. 
The  latter  was  sent  to  the  White  Lion.  Lambe  was  com- 
mitted to  the  Fleet  for  four  months  and  a  half  and  was  then 
released  on  security,  as  his  wife  and  family  were  without 
maintenance.  He  was  ordered  "  not  to  preach,  baptize,  or 
frequent  any  conventicle  "  until  his  next  appearance  in  court. 

A  brief  description  of  various  separatist  gatherings  held  in 
London  at  this  period  is  found  in  a  pamphlet  entitled,  "  THE  | 
BROWNISTS  I  SYNAGOGVE  |  ...",  1641  ^  Of  course  it  is 
improbable  that  the  entire  contents  of  this  work  are  veracious, 
but  there  is,  no  doubt,  some  historical  foundation  for  what 
is  said,  and  the  writer  may  possibly  have  personally  visited 
the  meetings  which  he  here  enumerates.  At  any  rate,  the 
pamphlet  shows  what  impression  the  separatists  made  upon 
some  of  their  contemporaries. 

The  first  Brownist  mentioned  is  one  Richard  Rogers,  a 
glover  who  lived  near  Whitecross  Street  in  "  Blew- Anchor- 
Alley",  in  the  suburbs  of  London.  He  is  said  oftentimes  to 
have  called  a  "  Congregation  as  he  termes  it ",  and  to  have 
claimed  that  he  spoke  "  nothing,  but  that  which  the  spirit  gives 
[gave]  him  utterance  for  ". 

Jeremy  Manwood  of  Goat  Alley,  also  near  Whitecross  Street, 
is  said  to  have  taught  once  every  fortnight  and  maintained  that 
separatists  should  "  abhorre  the  Society  of  the  wicked  ". 

Edward  Gyles  is  reported  to  have  had  a  congregation  or 
company  in  Checker  Alley  in  the  same  general  locality,  and  to 
have  preached  on  the  first  day  of  each  month.  He  had 
evidently  denounced  "  the  guilded  Crosse  in  Cheapside ",  be- 
cause, in  his  opinion,  many  people  worshipped  it  as  an  idol. 

A  button-maker  in  Aldersgate  Street,  Marler  by  name,  is 

1  See  "Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,... Charles  I,  1640", 
London,  1880,  p.  385. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  426.  3  jiid^^  pp.  391  and  432. 

*  Since  my  account  was  written,  the  text  of  this  pamphlet  with  a  brief 
introduction  has  been  published  in  the  "  Transactions "  of  the  Congrega- 
tional Historical  Society  for  May,  1910,  pp.  299-304. 


206  Em'ly  Eyiglish  Disseiiters 

said  to  preach  once  a  week.  He  seems  at  some  time  to  have 
expressed  the  opinion  that  any  one  may  preach,  whatever  his 
calling,  and  that  because  the  clergy  are  "  droanes  ",  there  is  all 
the  more  reason  why  a  layman  like  himself  should  "  show  him- 
selfe  a  laborious  Bee  ". 

John  Tucke  is  said  to  hold  meetings  in  Fleet  Lane,  and  to 
maintain  that  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  taken  from  the 
Mass  Book. 

Humphrey  Gosnold  has  meetings  near  Tower  Hill.  He 
wears  long  hair,  and  has  told  "  his  holy  assembly,  that  those 
Pipes,  or  Organs,  which  are  set  up  in  Pauls  Church,  and  other 
places,  make  more  noyse  with  their  roaring,  then  all  the 
Bulls  of  Basan  did,  when  Oyg  their  King  passed  by  them  in 
tryumph  ". 

Jonas  Hawkins,  a  fisherman  living  in  Chick  Lane,  urges 
separation. 

John  Brumley  of  Chancery  Lane  preaches  twice  a  week. 

Roger  Kennet,  a  Yorkshireman,  has  gathered  a  company 
near  the  Royal  Exchange.  He  evidently  taught  that  salvation 
was  limited  to  members  of  his  own  congregation. 

Edward  Johnson,  a  chandler,  is  reported  as  teaching  a 
company  in  More  Lane.  He  believes  "  that  the  home,  field,  or 
Wood  wherein  their  Congregation  meets,  is  the  Church  of  God, 
and  not  the  Churches  we  meet  in  [in  the  Church  of  England], 
because  the  good  and  bad  come  both  thither,  neither  is  it 
lawfull  to  have  any  society  with  the  wicked ". 

John  Bennet,  who  preached  in  Love  Lane,  Westminster,  is 
said  to  condemn  human  learning. 

George  Dunny  teaches  a  society  of  "  seperated  Saints  "  in  the 
Minories. 

Charles  Thomas,  a  Welshman,  holds  a  conventicle  every  two 
weeks  in  Warwick  Lane.  Those  who  prophesy  or  preach, 
he  maintains,  should  be  "  devout  men "  "  familiar  with  the 
Spirit ". 

Alexander  Smith  teaches  a  congregation  in  Shoreditch.  He 
believes  that  no  one  who  is  not  called  thereto  by  the  Spirit 
should  preach.  He  is  reported  to  have  maintained  that  the 
Latin  language,  which  was  so  much   used  by  "  Schollers,  as 


Obscure  Separatist  Congregations  207 

Bishops,  Deanes  and  Deacons  ",  "  stinkes  like  a  peece  of  Biefe  a 
twelve  moneth  old,  yet  new  salted  ". 

Edmond  Nicholson  is  said  to  teach  in  an  alley  in  Seacoal 
Lane  an  assembly  of  "  the  Elect  and  pure  in  Spirit,  chosen 
vessels  of  honour,  and  not  of  this  world  ". 

Greene  and  Spencer,  "  the  two  Arch-Separatists ",  are  re- 
ported to  preach  in  no  regular  place.  Greene  is  called  a  felt- 
maker,  and  Spencer  a  coachman.  They  called  an  assembly  upon 
Tuesday,  Sept.  28,  [1641  ?]  in  Houndsditch.  One  of  them 
taught  to  this  effect :  "  That  the  Bishops  function  is  an  Anti- 
christian  calling,  and  the  Deanes  and  Prebends,  are  the  Frogs 
and  Locusts  mentioned  in  the  Revelation,  there  is  none  of 
these  Bishops  (saith  he)  but  have  a  Pope  in  their  bellies,  yea 
they  are  Papists  in  grain,  and  all  of  them  vnleavened  soules, 
&  we  have  turned  them  over  to  be  buffetted  by  Satan,  and 
such  like  Shismaticall  [sic\  Phrases,  as  the  evill  Spirit  moves 
him  ". 

The  manner  in  which  these  London  separatists  generally 
held  their  meetings  is  vividly  described  as  follows^: — 

In  that  house  where  they  intend  to  meet,  there  is  one  appointed 
to  keepe  the  doore,  for  the  intent,  to  give  notice  if  there  should  be 
any  insurrection,  warning  may  be  given  them. 

They  doe  not  flocke  all  together,  but  come  2.  or  3.  in  a  company, 
any  man  may  be  admitted  thither,  and  all  being  gathered  together, 
the  man  appointed  to  teach,  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  Roome,  and 
his  audience  gather  about  him. 

He  prayeth  about  the  space  of  halfe  an  houre,  and  part  of  his 
prayer  is,  that  those  which  come  thither  to  scoffe  and  laugh,  God 
would  be  pleased  to  turne  their  hearts,  by  which  meanes  they 
thinke  to  escape  vndiscovered. 

His  Sermon  is  about  the  space  of  an  houre,  and  then  doth 
another  stand  up  to  make  the  text  more  plaine,  and  at  the  latter 
end,  he  intreates  them  all  to  goe  home  severally,  least  the  next 
meeting  they  should  be  interrupted  by  those  which  are  of  the 
opinion  of  the  wicked,  they  seeme  very  stedfast  in  their  opinions, 
and  say  rather  then  they  will  tuine,  they  will  burne. 

It  can  readily  be  seen  from  what  has  been  said  of  these 
Brownist  congregations  in  London,  that  they  could  hardly  be 

1  "The  Brownists  Synagogve",  1641,  pp.  5-6. 


208  Early  English  Dissenters 

called  churches,  or  even  organizations.  They  appear  rather  to 
have  been  only  informal  gatherings  of  people  who  were  beginning 
to  think  for  themselves,  and  to  wonder  whether  the  Church  of 
England  was  really  of  any  value  to  them.  They  were  certainly 
little  aware  of  the  fact  that  they  were  on  the  eve  of  one  of  the 
greatest  political  and  religious  upheavals  of  modern  times,  but 
they  were,  nevertheless,  all  silently  helping  to  bring  about  the 
Civil  Wars  and  the  establishment  of  the  Commonwealth. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  FAMILY  OF   LOVE  AND  THE  ENGLISH   SEEKERS 

I.     The  Family  of  Love,  or  Familists. 

After  what  has  been  written  concerning  the  Family  of 
Love  by  Dr  F.  Nippold'  and  by  Mr  Robert  Barclay-,  there 
seems  little  need  to  devote  much  time  to  that  rather  mysterious 
society.  The  Familists  appear  not  to  have  been  a  body  of 
separatists  from  the  Church  of  England,  or  even  from  the 
Church  of  Rome,  and  yet  they  certainly  held  private  gatherings, 
and  at  an  early  date  were  evidently  confused  with  the  Seekers, 
who  especially  after  1641  had  a  very  important  influence  on  the 
development  of  English  separatism.  In  the  popular  mind  the 
Family  of  Love  also  seems  to  have  been  erroneously  regarded 
as  a  branch  of  the  Anabaptists,  and  this  fact  gives  added  reason 
why  the  Familists  should  at  least  be  mentioned  in  this  work. 

For  an  account  of  the  life  of  Henry  Niclaes,  or  Nicholas, 
who  was  commonly  referred  to  in  the  late  sixteenth,  and  early 
seventeenth,  centuries  as  "  H.  N.",  and  whose  initials  were  said 
by  his  followers  to  have  a  mystic  meaning,  one  may  turn  to  the 
previously  mentioned  article  by  Dr  Nippold.  This  pays  much 
attention  to  Niclaes'  many  books,  which  were  originally  written 
in  Low  German  and  most  of  which,  if  not  all,  were  translated 
into  Latin,  French,  and  English,  and  gives  an  elaborate  de- 
scription of  the  Family  of  Love  which  he  organized. 

*  In  his  article  entitled,  "  Henrich  Niclaes  und  das  Haus  der  Liebe. 
Ein  monographiacher  Versuch  aus  der  Secten-Geschichte  der  Reforma- 
tionszeit...Erster  Artikel:  Leben  des  Niclaes",  contained  in  the  "  Zeit- 
schrift  fiir  die  historische  Theologie ",  Gotha,  1862,  pp.  323-94. 

^  In  "The  Inner  Life  of  the  Religious  Societies  of  the  Commonwealth" 
Third  Edition,  London,  1879,  pp.  25-32,  etc. 

B.  14 


210  Early  English  Dissenters 

It  was  about  1574  that  the  appearance  of  English  trans- 
lations of  Niclaes'  works  began  to  disturb  the  then  comparatively 
peaceful  religious  atmosphere  of  England.  By  1579  they  were 
being  vigorously  attacked.  What  appear  to  be  exaggerated,  if 
not  unwarranted  charges,  moreover,  were  at  that  time  and  later 
brought  against  the  Familists, — charges  which  until  recent 
times  clung  tenaciously  to  their  name.  Queen  Elizabeth  did 
what  she  could  to  suppress  this  sect  as  it  was  mistakenly  called, 
but  her  efforts  seem  to  have  failed,  for  the  Family  of  Love  was 
certainly  well  known  in  England  as  an  existing  society  during 
the  reigns  of  James  I  and  Charles  I. 

At  the  present  time  the  Library  of  the  British  Museum  is 
well  stocked  with  the  English  editions  of  the  writings  of 
"  H.  N."  For  any  study  of  the  organization  of  the  Familists, 
however,  three  manuscripts  are  of  exceptional  importance. 
These  are  described  as  follows  by  Dr  Nippold,  and  are  to  be 
found  in  the  "  Bibliothek  der  Maatschappy  van  Nederlandsche 
Letterkunde  "  at  Leyden : — 

1.  Chronika  (oder  Cronica)  des  Htisgesinnes  der  Lieften:  Daer- 
inne  betuget  wert  de  Wunderwercken  Godes  tor  lester  tydt,  unde 
idt  jene  dat  H.N.  unde  dem  Hiisgesinne  der  Lieften  wederfaren 
is. — Dorch  Daniel,  ein  Mede-older  mit  H.  N.  in  dem  Hiisgesinne  der 
Lieften,  am  dach  gegeven.     Psalm  46  :  65.  (53  cap.  160  fol.). 

2.  Acta  H.  N. — De  Gescheften  H.  N.  unde  etlicke  hemmelsche 
Werckinge  des  Herrn  undt  Godes,  die  H.  N.  van  syner  joget  ann 
wedderfaren  zynt. — Dorch  Zacharias,  ein  Mede-Older  in  dem  Hiisge- 
sinne der  Lieften,  am  dach  gegeven.  Psalm  46.  4.  Prov.  2.  (25 
cap.  70  foL). 

3.  Ordo  Sacerdotis — De  Ordeningen  des  priesterlicken  States 
in  dem  Hiisgesinne  der  Lieften,  also  H.  N.  desulve  uth  dem  Munde 
unde  Worde  des  Herrn,  na  idt  waeraftige  Wesen,  sulvest  geschreven, 
unde  den  Olderen  unde  Ministercn  in  dem  Hiisgesinne  der  Lieften 
overandtwordet  heft.  Psalm  32.  Prov.  1.  Jes.  61.  1.  Petr,  2. 
(27  cap.  70  fol.). 

In  England  there  are  probably  no  manuscripts  related  to 
this  subject  as  important  as  the  last  of  these  three,  but  I  have 
come  across  several  which  are  of  considerable  interest.  One  of 
these,  which  may  be  mentioned  here,  is  apparently  an  unique 
copy  of  an  English  Farailist  Hymn  Book,  translated  from  one 
of  the  Dutch  editions  of  "  H.  N."  's  Hymns.     This  seems  to 


The  Family  of  Love  arid  the  English  Seekers     211 

have  been  intended  for  publication'  and  use  at  the  private 
meetings  of  the  English  Family  of  Love.  The  work  is  en- 
titled, "  Psalmes  and  Songes  /  |  brought-forth  through  H  |  N. 
when  the  Lorde  to&ched  hym  |  with  the  Rodd  of  his  Chasten- 
inge/  I  and  lett  hym  see  that  Horrible-dis|truction  of  all  the 
Vngodlie/that  [  Endeof  the  Wicked-worlde:  |  makinge  manifest 
eiienso  vnto  hym  |  the  new-daye  of  the  Loue  /  that  |  kingdome 
of  Godes  heauenlie  Fair?  j nes  [?]/ the  Lordlie-tocominge  of  j 
Christ  /  to  the  renewinge  of  |  Earth  ]  with  Righttiosnes.  |  ..." 
The  manuscript  is  carefully  written  on  paper-,  and  though 
undated  was  probably  prepared  between  1574  and  1600. 

After  an  introduction  of  twenty-eight  pages  come  various 
Psalms  and  then  follow  fourteen  "  Songes  "  or  hymns.  Here  is 
a  portion  of  one  of  the  Psalms  : — 

The  Firste  Psallme. 

...0  Lorde  my  harte  quaketh  /  my  Legges  wex  feble  /  Sorrowfullnes  / 
Paine  /  Sufiferringe  /  and  Sraarte  ouerfalleth  [?]  mee. 

Euenso  feare  I/O  Lorde  /  thy  chasten  inge  /.  For  in  thy 
reproueinge  makest  thou  my  Sinnes  knowen  vnto  mee  /  and 
thou  lettest  mee  see  the  Wicked  thinges  /  which  haue  captiued 
mee. 

Willt  not  thou  /  O  God  /  releace  mee  from  the  same  ?  so  byde  I 
then  in  mysterie  /  and  miiste  feare  thy  Hande  all  wayes. 

But  thou  /  0  lorde  /  arte  one  that  woundeste  /  and  makest  hoall 
againe  :  helpe  mee  therfore  euen  as  thou  arte  wonte. 

Lett  that  sichinge  [searching  ?]  out  of  the  Deepnes  of  my  harte 
come  before  the  and  wind  not  awaye  thy  mercy  fullnes  frome  mee. 

Among  the  hymns  the  following  may  be  given  as  an 
illustration : — 

A  Songe  after  the  tune : 

The  Daye  appeareth  in  the  Easte  ifec. 

1  Awake  0  lorde  nowe  vnto  mee  / 
vnstoppe  the  Fares  thine  / 

my  harte  I  ttirne  then  to  thee  / 
herken  to  the  Compleinte  myne. 

2  The  heauines  of  my  wickednes  / 
bringeth  my  harte  frome  eas  / 

1  But  I  do  not  think  it  was  ever  published. 

-  MS.  869  in  Lambeth  Palace  Library.  I  give  only  the  original  text 
without  additions  or  marginal  notes. 

U— 2 


212  Early  English  Dissenters 

my  Sorrowe  must  I  confesse  / 
If  it  mought  O  Lorde  the  please. 

3  Witsafe  [?]  to  mee  to  winde  / 

my  Greef  O  Lorde  beholde  &  see  / 
let  not  the  Syimes  mee  blinde  / 
but  enlarge  thy  Grace  ouer  mee. 

4  O  lorde  beholde  my  heauines  / 
and  the  great  sorrowe  of  myne  / 
geue  mee  y'  Comforte  in  Distres : 
in  this  my  needye  tyme. 

5.  Euell  hath  aught  my  hartes  lust  / 

and  in  sorrowe  brought  mee : 
I  longe  for  thy  Deliuerance  iiist  / 
lorde  pluck  not  that  away  to  y^. 

6  Clens  nowe  O  lorde  my  harte  / 

and  geue  to  mee  y'  Spirite  of  rest : 
the  Euell  it  doth  bringe  my  smarte  / 
and  maketh  also  in  mee  tempest. 

There  are  in  all  ten  stanzas  of  this  hymn,  but  as  translated 
none  of  them  are  of  any  poetical  merit.  Who  would  ever  read 
them  to-day  except  as  curiosities  of  expression  ?  One  of  the 
hymns  (No.  14)  is  entitled,  "  A.  Daunsing  Songe  ",  but  this  also 
is  as  lacking  in  rhythm  as  the  others. 

Before  1600  the  Family  of  Love  can  have  attracted  few 
converts  in  England,  and  even  until  1620  and  later  it  must 
have  made  slow  progress.  Edmond  Jessop,  however,  about 
1620  after  he  had  become  an  Anabaptist,  nearly  fell  into  the 
meshes  spread  for  him  by  the  ardent  followers  of  "  H.  N."  He 
knew  therefore  from  experience  what  the  Family  of  Love  was 
really  like  and  what  was  taught  its  members.  The  following  is 
Jessop's  account  of  it : — 

some  others  [other  Anabaptists]  (who  being,  as  it  were,  distracted 
with  these  things)  haue  fallen  to  another  (the  most  blasphemous  and 
erronious  sect  this  day  in  the  world)  commonly  called  by  the  name 
of  the  Family  of  lotie,  whose  author  was  one  Henrie  Nicolas,  or  H.  N. 
for  so  they  will  haue  him  called,  that  is  (as  they  expound  it)  Homo 
Nouus,  the  new  man,  or  the  holy  nature,  or  holinesse,  which  they 
make  to  be  Chx^ist,  and  sin  they  will  haue  to  be  Antichrist,  because 
it  is  opposite  to  Christ.  They  say,  that  when  Adam  sinned,  then 
Christ  was  killed,  and  Antichrist  came  to  Hue.  They  teach,  that 
the  same  perfection  of  holinesse  which  Adam  [had  ?]  before  he  fell, 
is  to  be  attained  here  in  this  life ;  and  affirme,  that  all  their  Family 


The  Family  of  Love  and  the  English  Seekers    213 

of  loue  are  as  perfect  and  innocent  as  he.  And  that  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  spoken  of  by  Saint  Paul  in  the  1.  Cor.  15.  and  this 
prophesie,  Then  shall  he  fulfilled  the  saying  which  is  written,  0  death, 
where  is  fht/  stiny  ?  0  yraue,  where  is  thi/  victory  ?  is  fulfilled  in 
them,  and  denie  all  other  resurrection  of  the  body  to  be  after  this 
life.  They  will  haue  this  blasphemer  H.  N.  to  be  the  sonne  of  God, 
Christ,  which  was  to  come  in  the  end  of  the  world  to  iudge  the 
world ;  and  say,  that  the  day  of  iudgement  is  already  come ;  and 
that  //.  xA'.  iudgeth  the  world  now  by  his  doctrine ;  so  that  whoso- 
euer  doth  not  obey  his  Gospel,  shall  (in  time)  be  rooted  out  of  the 
world  ;  and  that  his  Family  of  loue  shall  inherite  and  inhabite  the 
earth  for  euer,  world  without  end ;  only  (they  say)  they  shall  die  in 
the  bodie,  as  now  men  do,  and  their  soules  go  to  heauen,  but  their 
posterities  shall  continue  for  euer.  This  deceiuer  describeth  eight 
through  breakings  of  the  light  (as  he  termeth  them)  to  haue  beene 
in  eight  seueral  times  from  Adam  to  the  time  that  now  is,  which 
(as  he  saith)  haue  each  exceeded  other ;  the  seuenth  he  alloweth 
lesus  Christ  to  be  the  publisher  of,  and  his  light  to  be  the  greatest 
of  all  that  euer  were  before  him  ;  and  he  maketh  his  owne  to  be  the 
eigth,  and  last,  and  greatest,  and  the  perfection  of  all,  in  and  by 
which  Christ  is  perfected,  meaning  holinesse.  He  maketh  euery 
one  of  his  Family  of  loue  to  be  Christ,  yea  and  God,  and  himself e 
God  and  Christ  in  a  more  excellent  manner,  saying,  that  he  is 
Godded  with  God,  and  codeitied  with  him,  and  that  God  is  homini- 
fied  with  him. 

These  horrible  blasphemies,  with  diuers  others,  doth  this  H.  JV. 
and  his  Family  teach  to  be  the  euerlasting  Gospel,  which  the  Angell 
is  said  to  preach  in  Reuelation  14.  6.  and  himselfe  to  be  the  Angell, 
yea  and  the  Archangell  which  is  said  to  sound  the  great  and  last 
trump,  Reuel.  11.  15.  They  professe  greater  loue  to  the  Church  of 
Rome,  and  to  all  her  idolatries  and  superstitions,  then  they  do  to 
any  Church  else  (whatsoeuer)  except  themselues.  They  wickedly 
abuse  these  words  of  Christ,  /  must  walke  to  day,  and  to  morrow,  and 
the  third  day  I  shall  be  perfected ;  and  say,  that  by  to  day  is  meant 
the  time  of  lesus  Christ  and  his  Apostles ;  and  by  to  morrow,  all 
the  time  of  the  religion  of  the  Church  of  Rome ;  and  by  the  third 
day,  this  their  day  of  //.  N.  and  his  Family,  wherein  they  wil  haue 
Christ  to  be  perfected.  And  they  doe  compare  all  the  whole 
religion  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  to  the  law  of  Moses ;  aflBrming, 
that  as  God  did  teach  his  people  by  those  shadowes  and  types  till 
lesus  Christ  came,  so  he  hath  taught  the  world  (euer  since)  by  the 
images,  sacrifices,  and  filthy  heathenisme  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
till  this  wretch  H.  N.  came,  and  now  he  must  be  the  onely  chiefe 
teacher,  Gods  obedient  man,  yea  his  sonne,  as  they  blasphemously 
call  him ;  he  (by  his  Gospell)  must  make  all  perfect.  They  will 
outwardly  submit  to  any  kind  of  religion,  and  to  any  idolatrous 
seruice  whatsoeuer,  pretending  it  is  not  the  bodie  that  can  sinne, 
but  the  soule.     They  will  be  Priests  in  the  Cliurch  of  Rome,  and 


214  Ea7'ly  English  Dissenters 

act  their  Seruice  after  their  raaner  of  deuotion ;  and  as  Satan  can 
transforme  himselfe  into  an  Angell  of  light,  so  they  can  thrust 
themsehies  (likewise)  to  be  publike  Ministers  and  Preachers  in  the 
Church  of  England  ;  yea  into  the  Kings  Chappell,  and  to  be  of  his 
officers  and  messengers,  so  bold  they  are,  euen  at  this  present ;  and 
so  close  and  cunningly  they  can  carry  themselues  (being  directed 
thereto  by  their  Master  H.  N.)  that  yee  shall  hardly  (euer)  find  them 
out.  They  will  professe  to  agree  in  all  points  with  the  Church  of 
England,  as  also  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  if  they  should  be 
examined  by  them,  onely  this,  they  will  not  (lightly)  deny  their 
Master  H.  N.  nor  speake  euill  of  him  or  his  writings,  if  they  should 
be  put  to  it :  and  there  is  no  way  but  this  whereby  to  discouer 
them,  I  say,  to  put  them  to  the  deniall  and  abiuring  of  him  and  his 
writings,  and  to  pronounce  him  a  blasphemer,  and  his  doctrine 
blasphemous ;  this  they  will  hardly  doe,  vnlesse  they  be  not  yet  his 
full  disciples'. 

II.     The  Legatine- Avians,  or  English  Seekers. 

Somewhat  closely  allied  to  the  Familists,  but  apparently 
distinct,  though  perhaps  originally  derived,  from  them,  were 
the  English  Seekers.  How  early  they  arose  is  uncertain,  but 
it  seems  probable  that  the  three  brothers  Legate  were  their 
first  representatives  in  England,  and  that  they  began  to  cham- 
pion Seeker  views  about  1600,  possibly  even  before  that  date. 
The  Seekers  believed  that  since  Antichrist  had  ruled  so 
long  over  the  Church,  no  true  church  and  true  church-officers 
existed  any  longer  in  all  the  world,  and  furthermore  that 
they  could  not  be  secured  until  God  sent  new  apostles  or 
prophets  to  ordain  new  elders  and  establish  entirely  new 
churches.  They  claimed  also  that  it  was  undesirable  for 
any  man  to  seek  to  hasten  God's  own  peculiar  business, — an 
opinion,  of  course,  which  was  particularly  distasteful  to  those 
English  separatists  who  saw  no  need  of  delaying  the  preaching 
of  the  Gospel  and  the  organization  of  new  churches.  Among 
those  to  oppose  the  views  of  the  Seekers  were  the  English 
General  Anabaptists,  who  as  early  as  1611  seem  to  have  con- 
founded them  with  the  Family  of  Love,  though  the  Familists  so 
far  as  I  am  aware,  never  held  the  previously  mentioned  views 

•  Edmond  Jossop's  "A  Discovery  of  the  Errors  of  the  English  Ana- 
baptists", London,  162.3,  pp.  88-91. 


The  Family  of  Love  and  the  English  Seeker s    215 

which  were  evidently  peculiar  to  the  Seekers.  Inasmuch, 
however,  as  at  a  later  period  also  the  Familists  and  the  Seekers 
were  confused  in  the  same  way,  we  may  cite  the  General  Ana- 
baptist, Thomas  Helwys,  on  this  point  as  apparently  one  of  the 
first,  if  not  the  first,  to  make  this  mistake.     He  says' : — 

wee  passe  by  the  most  vngodly  &  vnwise  Familists  and  scattered 
flock,  that  say  he  [Christ]  is  in  the  desert,  that  is  no  where  to  be 
found  in  the  profession  of  the  gospell  according  to  the  ordinances 
thereof  vntill  their  extraordinarie  men  (they  dream  of)  come, 
which  shall  not  be,  vntil  there  come  a  new  Christ,  &  a  new 
gospell. 

Helwys  is  here,  it  seems  to  me,  not  describing  the  Familists, 
but  only  the  Seekers,  whom  he  here  styles  the  "  scattered 
flock ",  a  name  sometimes  given  to  them  before  1620. 

At  first  the  English  Seekers  seem  to  have  been  known  as 
English  Arians,  or  Legatine-Arians,  after  the  name  of  the  three 
brothers  Legate.  Henoch  Clapham  in  his  "  Antidoton ", 
published  at  London  in  1600,  apparently  makes  the  earliest 
reference  to  them,  when  he  says^: — 

Touching  our  English  Arrians,  they  deny  all  Baptisme  and  Ordina- 
tion, till  new  Apostles  be  sent  to  execute  those  parts  to  the  Gentiles, 
and  Elias  the  Thisbite  do  come  for  that  end  vnto  the  lewes. 

Later,  in  1608,  in  "  ERROVR  |  On  the  Right  hand  "^ 
Clapham  also  speaks  of  the  English  Seekers  as  Legatine-Arians. 
He  does  not  confuse  their  teaching  with  that  of  the  Familists, 
but  he  attributes  to  the  Familists  views  which,  though  popularly 
ascribed  to  them,  are  only  suggested  or  are  certainly  uncommon, 
if  they  ever  appear,  in  genuine  Familist  publications.  Edmond 
Jessop,  who  came  very  near  joining  the  Familists,  and  who, 
therefore,  well  knew  their  teaching,  only  remotely  hints  at  such 
opinions, and  clearly  differentiates  the  Seekers  fi:'om  the  Familists. 
Jessop  also  does  not  use  the  term  Seekers.  In  fact  he  gives  the 
followers  of  the  Legates  no  special  name.  The  name  Seekers  is 
said  to  have  been  used  by  John  Murton  in  1617  ^  but  in  1620  in 

1  In  "AN  AD^jvertisement  or  cadmonition,  |  unto  the  Congrega- 
tions,...", 1611,  p.  51. 

2  P.  33.  ^  Pp.  28-34. 

•*  See  Robert  Barclay's  "The  Inner  Life  of  the  Religious  Societies  of 
the  Commonwealth",  Third  Edition,  London,  1879,  pp.  411-12. 


216  Early  English  Dissenters 

"  A  Discription  of  what  Ood  hath  Predestinated  ",  he  does  not 

employ  that  term,  though  he  answers  their  argument,  that  a 

true  church  cannot  be  organized  before  a  prophet  like  John  the 

Baptist  or  new  apostles  arise,  by  quoting  the  passage  "  that  the 

least  in  the  Kingdome  of  God  is  greater  then  he  "*.     The  word 

Seeker  came  to  be  well  known  not  long  after  1640,  but  as  yet  I 

am  not  satisfied  that  the  term  was  ever  used  before  1620,  or  even 

before  1640. 

We  may  now  turn  to  Edmond  Jessop's  account  of  the  rise  of 

the  English  Seekers^: — 

there  were  (among  others)  three  Brethren,  ancient  Separatists  from 
the  Church  of  England,  liuing  sometimes  in  the  Cittie  of  London, 
their  names  were  Legat,  these  held  it  stifly,  that  their  must  be  new 
Apostles,  before  their  could  be  a  true  constituted  Church,  and  they 
drew  it  from  this  their  ground,  the  one  was  called  Walter  Legat, 
who  about  twenty  yeares  since  was  drowned,  being  with  one  of  his 
brethren  washing  himself e  in  a  riuer,  called  the  Old  Foord  ;  Another 
of  them  called  Thomas  Legat,  died  in  Newgate  about  sixteene  yeares 
since,  being  laid  there  for  the  Heresie  of  Arius ;  The  third  called 
Bartholoiiiezv  Legat,  was  burnt  in  Smithfield  about  ten  yeai^es  since, 
being  condemned  for  the  same  Heresie  of  Arius,  for  they  all  held, 
and  stood  stoutly  for  the  same  also.  These  Legats  had  a  conceit, 
that  their  name  did  (as  it  were)  foresliew  and  entitle  them,  to  be 
the  new  Apostles,  that  must  doe  this  new  worke ;  but  you  see  what 
became  of  them. 

Among  the  Legatine-Arians,  or  English  Seekers,  as  has 
already  been  said,  Edward  Wightman  should  probably  be 
included.  Fortunately  the  original  manuscript  relating  to  his 
trial  appears  to  be  catalogued  among  the  Ashmole  Manu- 
scripts^ in  the  Bodleian  Library.  This  gives  a  minute  and 
accurate  description  of  his  views,  and  as  yet  has  been  little 
used^     The   document   is   entitled,   "The   proceed[ings   a(?)]t 

1  P.  161. 

^  "A  Discovery  of  the  Errors  of  the  English  Anabaptists",  London, 
1623,  pp.  76-7. 

3  Ash.  MS.  1521  (vii).  Dr  John  T.  Christian  deserves  the  credit  of 
having  first  called  attention  to  this  valuable  MS. 

*  The  writer  of  the  article  on  Wightman  in  the  Dictionary  of  "  National 
Biography  "  does  not  mention  this  trial  record,  but  draws  his  information 
from  an  account  of  the  case,  written  by  Bishop  Neile  twenty-seven  yeai-s 
after  Wightnian's  execution,  and  preserved  in  the  Public  Record  Office, 
London. 


The  Familfi  of  Love  ami  the  EngUsh  Seekers    217 

Lichfield  in  .7.  |  Court  dayes  [against  ?]  Edward  Wightman  |  in 
case  of  b[lasphemie  &  (?)]  heresie ",  etc.,  and  is  dated  1611. 
The  seven  court  days  are  specified  as  Nov.  19,  26,  29,  and 
Dec.  2,  3,  4,  5  of  that  year.  The  record  is  written  partly  in 
Latin  and  partly  in  English.  From  it  we  may  gain  a  very 
good  idea  of  the  character  of  Wightman,  who  is  said  to  have 
been  the  last  person  in  England  to  be  burned  at  the  stake  solely 
on  account  of  his  religious  beliefs. 

Wightman  had  evidently  been  imprisoned  for  over  half 
a  year  at  least  before  his  trial.  He  was  first  examined  on 
April  18,  1611,  again  on  May  6,  as  to  certain  "Articles 
ministred  by  his  Maiestes  Commissioners  for  causes  ecclesi- 
asticall",  and  still  further  on  Sept.  9,  Oct.  8,  and  twice  on 
Oct.  29,  of  the  same  year.  The  first  day's  trial  on  Nov.  19  was 
held  in  the  Consistory  of  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Lichfield  in 
the  presence,  and  by  the  permission,  of  Richard  Neile,  Bishop  of 
Coventry  and  Lichfield.  We  learn  that  Edward  Wightman  was 
a  draper  of  the  parish  of  Burton  upon  Trent  in  Staffordshire  in 
the  diocese  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield,  and  that  he  was  tried  for 
heretical  depravity,  having  written  with  his  own  hand  and 
delivered  to  the  king  a  certain  book  in  manuscript  covering 
eighteen  leaves.  This  little  work  began  with  the  words :  "  A 
letter  Written  to  a  learned  man  [?  Anthony  Wotton]^  to  discover 
and  confu[t]e  the  doctrine  of  the  Nicolaitanes  very  mightely 
defended  with  all  the  learned  of  all  sortes,  and  most  of  all  hated 
and  abhorred  of  God  himself,  because  the  Wholl  world  is 
di'owned  therein :  And  seeing  he  hath  promised  to  answere  he 
knewe  not  vnto  What,  and  least  he  should  allsoe  deale  with 
me  as  the  men  of  that  faccion  haue  done  allready"  etc.  It 
concluded  thus :  "  And  say  glorie  be  to  God  alone  which 
dwelleth  in  the  high  heavens,  whose  good  will  is  such  towardes 
men  that  he  will  now  at  the  last,  plante  peace  on  the  earth,  and 
lett  all  people  say,  Amen.  By  me  Edward  Wightman  ",  It  is 
to  be  hoped  that  this  writing  may  some  day  be  found. 

'  One  Mr  [Anthony  ?]  Wotton  seems  to  have  promised  Wightman 
that  he  would  read  the  book,  and  "giue  him  an  Answere".  See  p.  2 
of  the  trial  record,  but  the  work  was  eventually  presented  to  King 
James  I,  and  may  have  been  ultimately  intended  for  him. 


218  Early  English  Dissenters 

On  Nov.  26,  the  second  day  of  the  trial,  the  number  of 
people  who  wished  to  be  present  was  so  great  that  the  Bishop 
could  not  get  into  the  Consistory,  and  he  accordingly  ordered 
the  session  to  be  held  in  the  Chapel  of  the  Blessed  Virgin, 
which  he  entered  between  one  and  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon. 
The  third  day's  trial  was  held  in  the  same  chapel,  the  fourth  in 
the  Consistory. 

From  what  was  said  on  the  fourth  day  it  appears  that 
Wightman  was  born  in  England  and  baptized  in  the  Church  of 
England,  "  And  that  from  the  tyme  of  his  Infancy  vntill  within 
theis  Two  yeares  last  past  he  did  hould  and  beleive  the  Trinity 
of  persons  in  the  vnity  of  the  diety  ".  The  fifth  and  sixth  days' 
examinations  were  held  in  the  Consistory.  The  seventh  day 
was  appointed  for  the  hearing  of  the  sentence. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  among  those  who  took  part  in 
this  trial  was  "  magister  Willelmus  Laude  Presidens  Collegij 
divi  lohannis  baptistae  in  Academia  Oxoniensi."  This  may 
have  been  Laud's  first  experience  with  a  heretic,  and  here 
perhaps  he  began  to  develop  his  mistaken  views  of  the  necessity 
of  maintaining  uniformity  of  religious  belief. 

Wightman's  trial,  it  should  be  said,  is  simply,  and,  so  far  as 
the  present  writer  can  judge,  impartially  described.  From  this 
record,  as  already  stated,  we  learn  that  Wightman  began  to 
hold  new  views  about  1609,  and  from  that  time  he  had 
probably  been  more  or  less  persecuted.  His  various  opinions, 
as  summed  up  in  his  sentence,  were  the  following: — 

That  there  is  not  the  Trinity  of  persons  (the  Father,  the  Sonn,  and 
the  holy  Ghost)  in  the  vnity  of  the  diety.  That  lesus  Christe  is 
not  the  true  naturall  Sonn  of  God,  perfect  God  and  of  the  same 
substance,  eternytie  and  Maiestie  With  the  Father  in  respect  of  his 
Godhead.  That  lesus  Christe  is  onely  mann  and  a  mere  Creature 
and  not  both  God  and  man  in  one  person.  That  Christe  our 
Saviour  tooke  not  humane  flesh  of  the  substance  of  the  virgine 
Marie  his  mother.  And  that  that  promise  The  seede  of  the 
Woman  shall  breake  the  serpents  head  was  not  fullfilled  in 
Christe.  That  the  person  of  the  holy  Ghost  is  not  God  coequal! 
coeternall  and  coessentiall  with  the  Father  and  the  Sonn.  That 
the  Three  Creedes  videlicet  the  Apostles  Creed,  the  Nicene 
Creed  and  Athanasius  Creed  (contayning  the  faith  of  the 
Trinity,  the  diety  of  Christe  and  the  holy  Ghost)  are  the  heresies 
of  the  Nicolaitanes.     That  yow  the  sayd  Edward  Wightman  are 


The  Family  of  Love  and  the  Fnf/h'sh  Seelcers    219 

that  Prophett  spoken  of  in  the  A^}^  Chapter  of  Deutronomy, 
and  the  .3.  k  .1 .  Chapters  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  theis 
wordes.  I  will  raise  them  vp  a  prophett,  from  amonge 
theire  Brethren  like  vnto  the,  &c.  And  that  that  place  of 
Isay  :  Whose  Fan  is  in  his  hand,  are  proper  &  personall  to  yow. 
And  that  yow  are  that  person  of  the  holy  Ghost  spoken  of  in  the 
Scriptures,  And  the  Comforter  spoken  of  in  the  .1^}'^  of  S^  lohns 
Gospell  in  theis  and  the  like  words  videlicet.  It  is  expedient 
for  yow  that  I  goe  away  for  if  I  goe  not  away  the  Com- 
forter will  not  come  vnto  yow,  but  if  I  depart  I  will  send 
him  vnto  yow,  and  Avhen  he  is  come,  he  will  reprove  the 
world  of  sin,  of  righteousnes,  and  of  iudgment.  And 
againe  "When  he  is  come  which  is  the  spiritt  of  trueth,  he 
will  leade  yow  into  all  trueth.  And  that  those  wordes  of  our 
Saviour  Christe.  Of  the  sin  of  blasphemie  against  the  holy 
ghost,  which  shall  neuer  be  pardoned  in  this  lief  nor  in 
the  lief  to  come,  are  ment  of  yourself.  And  that  that  place  the 
.4.^''  of  Malachie  .  of  Elias  to  come,  is  hkewise  proper  & 
personall  to  yow.  That  the  Soule  doeth  sleepe  in  the  sleepe  of 
the  first  death  as  well  as  the  body  and  is  mortall  as  towching  the 
sleepe  of  the  first  death,  as  the  bodie  is.  And  that  the  soule  of  our 
saviour  lesus  Christe  did  sleepe  in  that  sleepe  of  death  as  well  as 
his  body.  That  the  Soules  of  the  elect  Saintes  departed  are  not 
members  possessed  of  the  Triumphant  Church  in  heaven.  That  the 
baptizing  of  Infantes  is  an  abhomynable  Custome.  That  there 
ought  not  to  be  in  the  Church  the  vse  of  the  Lordes  supper  to  be 
celebrated  in  the  elementes  of  bread  and  wyne.  And  the  vse  of 
baptisme  to  be  celebrated  in  the  element  of  water,  as  they  are  now 
practized  in  the  Church  of  England  But  that  the  vse  of  Baptisme 
is  to  be  administred  in  Water,  only  to  Convertes  of  sufficient  age 
of  vnderstanding  converted  from  infydellity  to  the  faith.  That  God 
hath  orda^Tied  and  sent  yow  to  performe  your  parte  in  the  worke 
of  the  salvacion  of  the  world,  to  deliver  it  by  your  teaching  or 
admonicion  from  the  heresie  of  the  Nicolaitanes,  which  is  the 
common  receaved  faith  contayned  in  those  .3.  Invencions  of  mann 
(hec  enim  sunt  verba  tua)  comonly  called  the  Three  Creedes,  to 
witt,  The  .12.  articles  of  the  beleife.  The  Nicene  Creed,  and 
Athanasius  Creed,  which  faith  within  theis  .1600.  yeares  past 
hath  prevayled  in  the  World,  as  Christe  was  ordayned  and  sent  to 
saue  the  world,  and  by  his  death  to  deliver  it  from  sin,  and  to 
reconcile  it  to  God,  saving  that  it  be  not  vnderstood  that  the 
lymitacion  of  .1600.  yeares,  reach  to  the  tyme  of  Christe  and  his 
Apostles,  but  since  their  tyme.  And  that  Christianity  is  not  truely 
sincerely  and  Wholly  professed  and  pi*eached  in  the  Church  of 
England  but  onely  in  parte,... 

To  show  how  ftxirly  the  Bishop  treated  Wightman  in  the  trial 
and  how  tenaciously  the  latter  held  to  his  beliefs,  it  should  be 


220  Early  English  Dissenters 

noticed  that  after  he  had  responded  to  all  the  questions  regard- 
ing his  heretical  opinions,  the  Bishop  asked  him  still  again  on 
the  fifth  day,  "  Whither  he  hath  made  theis  answers  advisedly 
deliberatly  and  freely  of  his  owne  Accord  without  distraccion  of 
mynde  or  any  other  distemperature.  Dictusque  Wightman 
respondebat  My  Lord,  Why  doe  yow  aske  me  such  a  Question, 
I  thincke  yow  seeke  to  disgrace  me  thereby ;  I  say,  that  vpon 
deliberate  advise  and  consideracion  and  freely  I  haue  made  my 
sayd  Answers,  and  I  doe  &  will  stand  to  them."  Wightman,  it 
is  stated \  was  first  brought  to  the  stake  at  Lichfield  on  March  9, 
1611/12,  but  on  feeling  the  heat  said  he  would  recant.  Two  or 
three  weeks  later,  however,  he  refused  to  recant  "  in  a  legal 
way ",  and  was  apparently  burned  during  the  month  of  April 
following.     He  is  said  to  have  died  blaspheming. 

In  conclusion  it  should  be  added  that  the  English  Seekers 
do  not  appear  to  have  been  of  much  influence  before  the  period 
of  the  Civil  Wars  and  the  Commonwealth,  Then  the  Friends, 
or  Quakers,  undoubtedly  arose  partly  as  the  result  of  the 
continued  dissemination  of  Legatine-Arian,  or  Seeker,  views. 

1  See  the  "  Dictionary  of  National  Biography  ". 


CHAPTER   IX 

THE  FIRST  TWO  ENGLISH   ANABA.PTIST   CONGREGATIONS 
AND   THEIR   LEADERS 

In  1590,  it  will  be  remembered,  R.  Alison*  says  that  some 
of  the  early  London  Barrowists  had  confessed  that  they 
"  attempted "  "  a  baptising  againe "  "  in  their  established 
Church  ".  This  statement,  interesting  as  it  is,  is  unconfirmed 
by  any  reliable  information  which  has  come  to  my  notice.  In 
fact,  it  is  certain  that  they  did  not  administer  a  second  baptism, 
though  they  seem  to  have  been  willing,  if  necessary,  to  reserve 
the  baptism  of  their  children  until  a  convenient  opportunity  for 
its  administration  presented  itself  However,  it  is  possible  that 
there  were  some  in  the  congregation  before  1590,  who  desired 
even  then  to  be  rebaptized,  but  were  not  able  to  accomplish 
their  wish. 

It  may  be  more  than  a  coincidence,  therefore,  that  later, 
when  the  Barrowists  had  for  the  most  part  emigrated  to 
Campen  in  Holland,  the  prevalence  of  Anabaptist  views  of  a 
Continental  t}^e  became  quickly  manifest  in  the  congregation, 
and  resulted  in  the  formation  of  the  earliest  group  of  English 
Anabaptists  of  whom  we  at  present  have  any  definite  knowledge. 
This  view,  I  am  aware,  is  not  the  one  which  has  been  generally 
maintained  by  scholars  in  recent  years,  to  the  effect  that  John 
Smyth's  congregation,  organized  in  1608  or  1609,  formed  the 
first  group  of  English  Anabaptists  of  which  Ave  have  any  satis- 
factory evidence.  The  incorrectness  of  this  latter  position  has 
only  been  gradually  forced  upon  me,  as  certain  details  relating 
to  English  Anabaptists  before  1603  have  been  specially  brought 

1  In  "A  plaine  Confvtation  of  a  Treatise  of  Brownisme",  London, 
1590,  sig.  A3  verso. 


222  Early  English  Dissenters 

to  my  attention.  These  details  which  at  first  appeared  to  have 
little  significance  on  account  of  their  brevity,  and  no  apparent 
interrelation,  can  by  necessity  refer  to  only  one  movement \  and 
when  brought  together,  may  be  correlated  and  woven  into  the 
new  view  here  presented.  Doubtless,  the  fact  that  the  few 
allusions  to  the  Johnsonian  Anabaptists  are  so  meagre  and  so 
scattered,  has  kept  them  from  being  appreciated  at  their  full 
value. 

In  the  first  place,  we  learn  from  Francis  Johnson-  that 
these  Anabaptists  were  composed  of  "  divers  "  members  of  his 
congregation;  that  before  they  adopted  their  new  beliefs  they 
evidently  did  not  secede  or  separate  from  his  church,  but  even 
for  some  time  afterwards  remained  members  of  it ;  and  finally 
that  as  they  persisted  in  their  views  and  probably  gave  no  sign 
of  returning  to  their  former  position,  they  were  excommuni- 
cated. From  various  citations  given  in  the  early  portion  of 
Chapter  VI  concerning  the  Barrowists  on  the  Continent  we  may 
also  infer  with  safety  that  this  Anabaptist  movement  occurred 
at  Campen  about  1594  through  the  influence  of  the  Dutch 
Mennonites,  and  may  have  led  to  the  removal  of  Johnson's 
congregation  from  Campen  to  Naarden. 

No  list  of  these  Johnsonian  Anabaptists  is  at  present  known, 
but  we  can  be  practically  certain  of  the  names  of  three  of  them, 
viz.,  Leonard  Pidder^  Henry  Martin^  and  T.[homas?]  M.[ichel, 
or  itchel  ?]^  To  these  may  possibly  be  added  the  names  of 
Thomas  Odal,  or  Odell^  and  Thomas  Lemar'',  perhaps  also  that 

1  No  well  authenticated  English  Anabaptist  movement  is  known  to 
have  occm-red  before  1603  besides  that  connected  with  Francis  Johnson's 
congregation  about  1594. 

2  In  "An  Inqvirie  and  Answer  Of  Thomas  White",  1606,  p.  63. 
This  passage  is  cited  in  full  in  Chapter  VI,  p.  156. 

3  "  The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists  ",  by  Chris- 
topher Lawne,  and  three  others,  1612,  4",  p.  56. 

4  Ibid. 

5  [lohn  Payne's]  "RoyaJl  exchange  :...",  1597,  4°,  p.  45. 
^  [George  Johnson's]  "A  discourse",  1603,  p.  194. 

^  Thomas  Lemar,  or  Le  Mare,  is  mentioned  in  the  Barrowist  lists  of 
1590.  In  "The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists",  1612,  pp.  55-6,  he 
is  represented  as  then  holding  at  least  one  Anabaptist  opinion. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    223 

of  John  Hancock  \  Of  this  number  we  later  find  Thomas  Odal, 
or  Odell,  in  the  Dutch-English  congregation  of  Amsterdam, 
which  had  been  formed  by  the  union  of  the  Smyth  party  with 
the  Dutch  Waterlanders,  a  branch  of  the  Mennonites. 

Were  the  Johnsonian  Anabaptists  rebaptized,  and  whence 
did  they  secure  their  new  baptism  ?  One  might  think,  in- 
asmuch as  they  remained  for  some  time  in  the  Barrowist 
congregation,  that  they  were  content  merely  to  hold  various 
Anabaptist  views  for  a  while  without  receiving  a  new  baptism, 
or  if  they  were  not  so  content,  that  they  applied  to  the  Dutch 
Mennonites  for  it.  In  my  opinion  Henoch  Clapham  in  a  work 
published  in  1600^  has  preserved  in  the  following  words  the 
answer  to  this  question.  But  for  this  passing  remark  of  his  we 
would  probably  never  have  known  of  this  interesting  event: — 

Touching  the  Anabaptists,  they  stand  not  partaking  in  the 
matter  (as  doth  the  Brownist)  but  they  exufflate  or  blow  off  our 
Baptisme,  so  well  as  Ordination, ...And  so,  one  baptizeth  [From 
margin  :  "  I  knew  one  such,  and  sundry  can  witnes  it."]  himselfe 
(as  Abraham  first  circumcised  himselfe :  uiary,  Abraham  had  a 
commandement ;  they  haue  none,  nor  like  cause)  and  then  he 
baptizeth  other ^.... 

Thus  we  learn  of  an  unnamed  se-baptist  before  1600  who 
baptized  himself  and  then  others,  as  John  Smyth  did  some 
years  later.  Furthermore,  Clapham  is  evidently  speaking  of  an 
English  se-baptist,  for,  in  the  first  place,  Clapham  had  known 
him,  and,  in  the  second  place,  no  Dutchman  would  have  thought 
of  baptizing  himself,  but  would  almost  certainly  have  applied  to 
the  Dutch  Mennonites  for  baptism.  It  is  not  easy  to  imagine 
who  this  first  English  se-baptist  can  have  been,  but  an  allusion 
made  in  1611  suggests  that  he  may  have  been  one  of  three  men, 
Leonard  Pidder,  Henry  Martin,  or  Thomas  Michel,  or  Mitchells 
In  1594  both  Pidder  and  Mitchell  were  about  thirty-one  years 

1  John  Hancock  must  have  joined  Johnson's  congregation  in  Holland. 
In  "The  Prophane  Schisms",  1612,  he  is  mentioned.  Then  he  was  a 
se-separatist. 

a  "  ANTIDOTON  :  |  OR  |  A  SOVERAIGNE  REI^IE-|DIE  AGAINST 
SCHISME  I  AND  HERESIE  :  | ...",  1600. 

3  P.  33.  The  mode  of  baptism  here  practised  was  undoubtedly  sprink- 
ling or  pouring. 

*  "The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists",  1612,  p.  56. 


224  Early  English  Dissenters 

old.  Martin's  age  T  do  not  know.  If  Leonard  Busher,  who 
then  was  only  twenty-three  years  of  age^  had  been  older,  one 
might  suspect  him  to  have  been  the  original  se-baptist  of 
history,  but  his  age  is  decidedly  against  such  a  supposition. 
Indeed,  it  appears  to  be  extremely  doubtful,  whether  he  was 
ever  connected  with  these  Anabaptists. 

As  to  the  views  of  the  Pidder-Martin-Mitchell  Anabaptists, 
we  are  carefully  informed  by  John  Payne  in  a  work*  published 
at  Haarlem  in  1597,  of  which  the  "  Epistle "  is  addressed  to 
"  Mr.  A.  T.''  wth  \sic\  others  of  my  lovinge  acquayntans  in  the 
Royall  Exchange  "  at  London  : — 

Gentlemen  warned  of  the  opinions  of  the 
Anabaptists. 

Fyrst  our  Englishe  and  Dutche  here  howld  that  Christ  toke  not 
his  pure  fleshe  of  the  Virgin  [Virgin]  Mary :  and  do  denie  her  to  be 
his  natural]  mother.  Secondl}'^  that  the  Godheade  was  subiect  to 
passions  and  to  deathe  wch  [sic]  ys  Impassible.  Thyrdly  that  the 
infants  of  the  faythfull  ought  not  to  be  baptysed.  Fourthly  that 
the  soules  do  slepe  in  grave  [sic]  wth  [sic]  the  bodies  vntijl  the 
resurrection.  Fyfthly  that  Maiestrates  ought  not  to  put  malefactors 
to  deathe.  Sixtly  [sic]  they  condemue  all  warrs  and  Subiects  in 
armure  iu  the  feyld.  Seventhly  they  denye  the  article  of  predesti- 
nation :  they  denye  the  L.[ord's]  day.  And  finally  they  vsavour 
moch  of  the  opinions  of  fi^e  wyll  /  and  the  merit  of  workes...* 

John   Payne  also  tells  us^  that  about  1597  the  members 

1  Busher  was  seventy-one  years  old  in  1642.  See  a  letter  by  him  of 
that  date  in  the  volume  of  documents. 

2  "  Royall  exchange :  |  To  suche  worshipfull  |  Citezins  /  Marchants  / 
Gentlemen  |  and  other  occupiers  of  the  contrey  as  |  resorte  thervnto. 
Try  to  retaine  /  Or  send  back  agayne.  |  The  contents  ys  after  the  Preface.  | 
Sene  and  allowed  here.  |  [Device.]  |  AT  HARLEM  /  |  Printed  wth  [sic] 
Gylis  Romaen.  |  M.D.XCVII",  4",  pp.  48,  Black  Letter. 

3  "  Mr.  A.  T."  may  have  been  Anthony  Thatcher,  who  is  mentioned  in 
George  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  1003,  p.  63,  and  who  in  1631  probably 
published  "A  Christian  Reprofe  against  Contention". 

4  P.  3. 

5  Pp.  21-2.  "  I  wishe  you  beware  of  the  dangerouse  opinions  of  suche 
Englyshe  Anabaptists  bred  here  /  as  whose  parsons  in  part  wth  [sic]  more 
store  of  there  letters  dothe  crepe  and  spreade  amongest  you  in  cittie  and 
contrey.  The  wch  perilouse  herysies  wherewth  they  be  so  lately  infected  / 
dyd  not  only  precede  of  obstinacie  iu  error  /  but  of  pryde  and  singularitie  / 
wth  the  want  of  love  and  humilitie  to  kepe  vuitie  and  peace  amouge  theme 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    225 

of  this  earliest  English  Anabaptist  company  were  sending 
letters  over  to  England  where  they  were  circulated  both  in 
London  and  in  the  country,  and  suggests  that,  not  content 
therewith,  one  of  their  number,  i.e.,  T.[homas?]  M.[itchelH]S 
had  journeyed  to  Norwich^  evidently  with  the  purpose  of 
making  converts.  Here  he  had  been  imprisoned  and  was 
"  shortly  lyke  to  die  ".  Payne  had  already  warned  "  sum  par- 
ticuler  freynds  "  against  the  Anabaptists.  He  now  published 
his  previously  mentioned  book  for  the  purpose  of  influencing 
the  English  public  against  them. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  know  if  this  earliest  company  of 
English  Anabaptists  endured  for  any  length  of  time,  and  what 
ultimately  became  of  them.    Some  of  their  number  were  known 

selves  when  they  came  over.  And  as  by  my  privat  letters  I  have  fore- 
warned sum  particuler  freynds  :  so  by  this  symple  and  forrayne  labor  / 1 
intended  a  more  generall :  sithens  I  heard  that  one  of  this  companie  in 
Norwich  intendeth  to  indure  shortly  an  execution  against  hym.  By  wch 
premonishement  I  would  gladly  make  you  more  carefull  and  watchefull  to 
prevent  the  invisible  sower  of  darnell  a  monge  the  good  wheate..." 

»  P.  45.  But  if  "  T.  M."  stands  for  Thomas  Michel  or  Mitchell,  as  is 
probable,  he  certainly  was  not  put  to  death,  but  was  evidently  banished 
a  second  time,  for  Prof.  J.  G.  de  Hoop  Scheflfer  in  an  appendix  to  his 
paper  on  "  The  Brownists  in  Amsterdam  ",  originally  published  in  Dutch 
in  the  Transactions  of  the  Koyal  Academy  of  Science  at  Amsterdam  for 
1881,  mentions  on  April  15,  1606,  the  marriage  of  Thomas  Michiels  of 
Cambridge  (turner  and  widower)  to  Margriete  Williams  of  Leicester 
("  Transactions  "  of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society  for  September, 
1905,  p.  163). 

^  Among  those  who  appear  to  have  been  influenced  by  the  earliest 
English  Anabaptists  was  one  John  Neale.  Neale  seems  to  have  become 
infected  with  Anabaptist  doctrine  at  a  very  early  period,  i.e.,  at  least  as 
early  as  1604,  as  may  be  inferred  from  the  following  record,  which  I  came 
across  in  the  Register  of  the  church  of  St  Peter  Mancroft,  Norwich,  under 
the  date,  "Nouem:  19",  1608:— 

"  lohn,  the  sonne  of  lohn  Neale,  sayweauer,  &  Margaret  his  wife,. ..this 
Childe  was  borne  at  Amsterdam,  or  Leyden  in  Holland,  &  was  not 
baptized  (his  father  being  an  Anabaptist)  till  this  yeare  bringing  his 
wife  &  Childe  over  to  see  loane  Vale  widdow,  her  mother,  &  other  freindes, 
where  the  saide  Margaret,  (refuseing  to  goe  ouer  sea  with  her  husband) 
discouered  the  not  baptizing  of  the  Childe,  &  craued  to  haue  it  baptized, 
the  Childe  being  at  this  time,  about  foure  yeres  old." 

B.  15 


226  Early  English  Dissenters 

to  be  alive  and  holding  Anabaptist  views  in  1611  \  but 
whether  they  formed  an  united  body  at  that  date  is  far  from 
certain.  If  such  had  been  the  case,  it  might  have  been  natural 
for  John  Smyth  and  his  party  to  have  consulted  them  and  to 
have  secured  their  baptism  through  them,  but  as  is  well  known, 
Smyth  baptized  himself  and  then  the  rest  of  his  party.  Probably 
the  opinions  held  by  the  Johnsonian  Anabaptists  were  too 
unorthodox  to  suit  him  and  his  adherents. 

Fortunately,  a  far  greater  number  of  historical  details 
relating  to  the  Anabaptist  congregation  organized  by  Smyth 
is  to  be  found  than  can  be  gleaned  concerning  the  foregoing 
company.  In  the  first  place,  we  may  glance  at  the  story  of 
Smyth's  life  which  is  unusually  interesting,  not  only  because 
of  his  beautiful  spirit  and  his  early  and  pathetic  death,  but  also 
because  of  his  ever-changing  views.  He  had  been  a  pupil  of 
Francis  Johnson  and  therefore  was  probably  matriculated  at 
Christ's  College,  Cambridge.  He  took  orders  of  Bishop  Wickham , 
"  prelate  of  Lincolne,  when  I  [Smyth]  was  chosen  Fellow  "^  of 
that  college.  That  Smyth  became  a  Fellow  of  Christ's  College 
and  then  took  orders,  are  facts  which  seem  hitherto  to  have 
been  too  largely  overlooked.  We  may  noAV,  therefore,  justly 
infer  that  he  was  a  person  of  considerable  learning,  as  well  as 
agree  with  Dr  Powicke  ("  Henry  Barrow  ",  p.  245),  that  he  pre- 
sumably never  held  any  benefice.  Bishop  Hall  is  a  good  witness 
of  Smyth's  ability,  when  he  says,  "  Alacke,  Master  Smiths  bring- 
ing up  hath  not  beene  so  Swineheard  and  Shepheard  like  :  He  is 
a  Scholler  of  no  small  reading,  and  well  scene  and  experienced  in 
Arts  "^  In  fact.  Bishop  Hall  possibly  looked  upon  Smyth  as  an 
abler  man  than  John  Robinson,  for  he  says, "  I  Wrote  not  to  you 
[Robinson]  alone :  what  is  become  of  your  partner,  yea,  your 
guide  ?  Woe  is  me,  he  hath  renounced  our  Christendome  with 
our  Church  :  and  hath  wash't  of  his  former  water,  with  new  "  *. 

1  "The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists",  1612,  p.  56. 

2  In  his  "  Paralleles,  Censvres,  Observations",  1609,  p.  102. 

3  In  I.  H.[all]'s  "A  Description  of  the  Chvrch  of  Christ,... against  cer- 
taine  Anabaptisticall  and  erroniovs  Opinions,  verie  hurtfull  and  dangerous 
to  weake  Christians...",  London,  1610,  p.  108. 

*  In  I.  H.[all]'8  "A  Common  Apologie",  London,  1610,  pp.  6-7. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregatio7is    227 

How  long  Smyth  remained  a  Fellow  at  Christ's  College, 
or  why  he  left  that  position,  is  not  at  present  known,  but 
I  have  been  informed  by  the  courtesy  of  Dr  John  Peile, 
late  Master  of  that  college,  that  Smyth  was  with  little  doubt 
admitted  a  sizar  in  March,  1586;  doubtless  took  his  B.A.  in 
1589/90  (though  that  degree  cannot  be  found);  advanced  to 
M.A.  in  1593 ;  and  became  Fellow  in  Michaelmas  term, 
1594,  when  he  was  ordained  by  Bishop  Wickham.  Smyth 
was  chosen  preacher  of  the  city  of  Lincoln  on  Sept.  27,  1600, 
and  on  August  1,  1602,  that  position  was  granted  to  him  for 
life'.  But  it  was  not  Smyth's  lot  to  enjoy  the  privileges  of  his 
office  for  long.  In  fact,  within  three  months  of  the  time  of  his 
appointment,  namely  on  Oct.  13,  1602,  "the  vote"  which  gave 
him  his  position  "was  annulled,  and  he  was  deposed "  "for  having 
'  approved  himself  a  factious  man  in  this  city  [of  Lincoln]  by 
personal  preaching,  and  that  untruly  against  divers  men  of  good 
place '"I  Before  December  13  he  appears  to  have  threatened  a 
lawsuit,  if  his  stipend  was  not  paid  according  to  agreement,  and 
even  as  late  as  1603  he  seems  to  have  still  maintained  his  right 
to  the  title  of  City  Preacher,  for  that  is  what  he  styles  himself 
in  a  little  book  published  in  that  year.  Of  this  work  there  is  at 
present  only  one  copy  known.  It  is  to  be  found  in  Emmanuel 
College  Library,  Cambridge,  and  is  entitled,  "  THE  |  BRIGHT 
MO'R-\NING  STARRE:  \  OR,  |  The  Resolution  and  |  Exposi- 
tion of  the  22.  Psalme,  preached  \  publikely  in  foure  sermons  | 
at  Lincolne.  \  By  10 HN  SMITH  Prea-| c/ier  of  the  Gitie.  |  ...  | 
Printed  by  lOHN  LEGAT,  |  Printer  to  the  Vniuersitie  of 
Cam-\bridge.  1603.  |  And  are  to  be  soldo  at  the  signe  of 
the  Crowns  in  |  Pauls  Churchyard  by  Simon  Waterson",  12°, 
pp.  vi,  196. 

On  March  22,  1604/5,  Smyth  published  his  second  work  en- 
titled, "A  I  PATERNE  I  OF  TRVE  |  PRAYER.  |  A  LEARNED 
AND  COMFOR-|table  Exposition  or  Commentarie  vpon  |  the 
Lords  Prayer :    wherein  the  Doctrine  of  |  the  substance  and 

'  See  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Shakespeare's  "  Baptist  and  Congregational  Pio- 
neers", London,  1906,  p.  129. 
^  Ibid. 

15—2 


228  Early  English  Dissenters 

circumstances  of  true  |  inuocation  is  euidently  and  fully  ]  de- 
clared out  of  the  holie  |  Scriptures.  |  By  Iohn  Smith,  Minister 
and  Preacher  of  the  \  Word  of  God.  \  [Device]  |  AT  LONDON  \ 
Imprinted  by  Felix  Kynston  for  Thomas  Man,  and  |  are  to  be 
sold  at  his  shop  in  Pater-noster  row  ]  at  the  signe  of  the  Talbot. 
1605  ",  4°,  pp.  viii,  182. 

In  1897  when  Mr  Arber  published  "The  Story  of  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers  ",  he  said  concerning  this  book,  "  Every  copy 
of  this  first  edition  of  1605  has  apparently  disappeared". 
Fortunately  Mr  Arber  was  mistaken.  A  copy  of  this  edition, 
unless  it  has  been  lost,  has  probably  been  in  York  Minster 
Library  from  the  time  of  its  publication,  and  since  Mr  Arber 
wrote  his  book  three  other  complete  copies  of  the  first  edition 
have  been  found.  Of  these,  one  is  in  the  Congregational 
Library,  London,  having  been  made  up  of  portions  of  two 
imperfect  copies,  thanks  to  the  good  fortune  and  vigilance  of 
the  present  Librarian,  the  Rev.  T.  G.  Crippen;  another  is  in 
the  Angus  Library  at  Regent's  Park  College,  London ;  and  the 
third  is  in  the  author's  collection.  A  second  edition  of  this 
work  was  published  in  duodecimo  in  1624.  It  also  is  scarce, 
but  there  are  copies  in  the  British  Museum  and  a  few  other 
libraries. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  that  at  the  time  this  work  was  printed  in 
1604/5  Smyth  no  longer  calls  himself  City  Preacher  of  Lincoln, 
but  simply  "  Minister  and  Preacher  of  the  Word  of  God  ",  and 
that  he  was  still  a  member  of  the  Church  of  England,  for  he 
says  in  the  Epistle  "To  the  Christian  Reader":  "I  doe  here 
ingenuously  confesse  that  I  am  far  from  the  o'pinion  of  them 
which  separate  from,  our  Church,  concerning  the  set  forme  of 
prayer  {although  from  some  of  them,  I  receiued  part  of  my 
education  in  Cambridge)". 

In  "The  Epistle  Dedicatorie ",  addressed  "To  the  Right 
Honovrable  Edmvnd  Lord  Sheffield,  Lord  Lievtenant,  and 
President  of  his  Maiesties  Councell  established  in  the  North  ", 
Smyth  gives  us  some  interesting  facts  relating  to  the  publica- 
tion of  "this  Treatise...,  which  not  long  since",  he  states, 
"  I  [he]  deliuered  to  the  eares  of  a  few,  being  then  Lecturer  in 
the  Citie  of  Lincolne  ".     What  had  induced  him  to  publish  the 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    229 

work,  he  says,  was  "  partly  the  motion  of  some  friends,  partly 
and  chiefly  the  satisfying  of  some  sinister  spirits  [who]  haue 
[had]  in  a  manner  wrested  from  me  [him]  that  [position  ?], 
whereto  otherwise  I  [he]  had  little  affection  ".  Certain  "  vniust 
imputations  and  accusations"  had  evidently  been  brought 
against  him,  and  these  he  had  been  compelled  to  answer  "before 
the  Magistrate  ecclesiastical."  The  matter  was  finally  brought 
for  settlement  before  Lord  Sheffield,  who  "  wisely  and  charitably 
compounded  the  controuersie  on  both  parts  to  the  contentment 
of  either  of  vs ;...",  a  very  unusual  result  for  that  disturbed 
period. 

Evidently  not  long  after  the  publication  of  this  work 
Smyth  began  to  entertain  doubts  concerning  the  Church  of 
England.  Perhaps  Francis  Johnson,  or  some  of  his  other 
separatist  acquaintances,  had  seen  the  passage  in  his  book 
cited  above,  and  had  called  his  view  in  question.  However  this 
may  be,  he  fell  into  a  state  of  doubt,  which,  he  says\  lasted 
"  9.  Months  at  the  least ".  During  this  time  he  seems  to  have 
been  for  the  most  part  at  or  about  Gainsborough,  for  he  says  in 
referring  to  this  period,  "  1  [I]  appeale  to  the  towne  of  Ganes- 
brugh,  &  those  ther  that  knew  my  footesteps  in  this  matter  "^ 
During  these  nine  months,  also,  it  would  appear,  he  "was 
delivered  twise  from  the  Pursivant,  &  was  sick  allmost  to 
death  "«  at  the  home  of  Thomas  Helwys''  at  "  Bashforth  "».  He 
had  further  a  "  quiet  &  peaceable  conference "  at  Coventry 
"  with  certayne  Ministers  "  (Mr  Dod,  Mr  Hildersham,  and  Mr 
Barbon)  "about  withdrawing  from  true  Churches,  Ministers, 
and  Worship,  corrupted :  Wherein  1  [I,  i.e.,  he]  receaved  no 
satisfaction,  but  rather  thought  1  [I,  i.e.,  he]  had  given  in- 
struction to  them  "^  Shortly  after  this  last  incident  Smyth 
became  a  separatist. 

*  See  "  Paralleles,  Censvres,  Observations",  1609,  p.  5. 
2  Ibid.,  p.  128.  3  Ibid. 

*  Thomas  Helwys  was  a  married  man,  and  I  have  discovered  that  he  was 
married  to  Joan  Ashmore  at  Bilborough,  Nottinghamshire,  on  Dec.  3, 1595 
("Nottinghamshire  Parish  Registers.    Marriages ",  Vol.  vi.,  London,  1904). 

^  See  "  The  last  booke  of  lohn  Smith,  Called  the  retractation  of  his 
errours,  and  the  conhrmation  of  the  truth". 

•^  See  "Paralleles,  Censvres,  Observations",  1609,  p.  129. 


230  Early  English  Dissenters 

The  years  1604-1606  happened  to  be  a  period  of  consider- 
able moment  in  Lincoln  Diocese.  The  Puritan  preachers  there 
wrote  an  extended  work  relating  to  their  grievances,  entitled 
"  An  Apologie  for  those  ministers  that  are  troubled  for  refusing 
to  Subscription  and  Conformitie ".  This  they  presented  to 
King  James  I  on  December  1,  1604,  and  later  abridged  and 
published  in  1605  under  the  title,  "An  Abridgment  of  that 
Booke  ",  etc.  This  work  pleads^  for  "  Christian  Libertie,  which 
Christ  hath  purchased  for  vs  by  his  death,  and  which  all  christians 
are  bound  to  stand  for,  that  the  service  wee  are  to  doe  vnto  God 
now  is  not  mysticall,  ceremoniall  and  carnal  {as  it  was  then)  but 
plaine  and  spirituall ". 

Smyth  may  possibly  have  had  some  part  in  the  preparation 
of  this  work.  At  any  rate,  he  probably  saw  the  printed  edition. 
Indeed,  such  a  passage  as  that  just  cited  may  have  helped  to 
persuade  him  finally  to  become  a  separatist.  He  apparently 
took  this  new  step  about  the  beginning  of  the  year  1605/6, 
together  with  many  others  who  had  gradually  been  coming 
to  the  separatist  position  in  Gainsborough,  Scrooby,  Bawtry, 
Babworth,  Worksop,  Austerfield,  and  their  neighbourhood.  At 
first  these  people  seem  merely  to  have  met  together  at  con- 
venient times  as  Puritan  members  of  the  Church  of  England. 
They  were  obliged,  however,  even  then  to  endure  various 
privations,  and  finally  they  decided  to  shake  off  the  yoke  of 
"  antichristian  bondage ",  and  to  organize  a  separatist  church 
of  their  own.  Therefore,  "as  the  Lords  free  people,  [they] 
joyned  them  selves  (by  a  covenant  of  the  Lord  [which  had 
perhaps  been  suggested  to  them  by  Smyth's  old  tutor,  Francis 
Johnson])  into  a  church  estate,  in  the  fellowship  of  the  gospell, 
to  walke  in  all  his  wayes,  made  known,  or  to  be  made  known 
unto  them,  according  to  their  best  endeavours,  whatsoever  it 
should  cost  them,  the  Lord  assisting  them  "\  The  place  where 
the  covenanting  occurred  is  not  stated. 

It  is  true  that  this  account  is  not  exactly  that  of  tradition, 
which   following  a   statement   in   Nathaniel   Morton's   "  New 

1  P.  34. 

2  Governor  Bradford's  "  History  '  Of  Plimoth  Plantation '.     From  the 
Original  Manuscript",  Boston,  1898,  p.  13. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    231 

Englands  Memorial ",  published  in  1669,  has  maintained  that 

the   covenanting   occurred   in    1602,   but    certainly   Governor 

Bradford's  own  version,  which  is  the  best  we  have,  indicates 

that  the  true  time  was  about  the  beginning  of  the  year  1606/7. 

On  this  point  he  says  explicitly^ : — 

So  after  they  had  continued  togeither  aboute  a  year,  and  kept 
their  meetings  euery  Saboth,  in  one  place,  or  other,  exercising  the 
worship  of  God  amongst  them  Selues,  notwithstanding  all  the 
dilligence  «fe  malice  of  their  aduerssaries ;  they  seeing  they  could 
no  longer  continue  in  that  condition,  they  resolued  to  get  ouer  into 
Holland  as  they  could.     Which  was  in  the  year  .1607.  «fe  .1608.... 

After  the  covenanting  two  distinct  congregations  were  organ- 
ized, which  met  separately  on  account  of  the  distance  between 
the  various  towns  in  which  the  separatists  lived.  One  church 
met  at  Scrooby  Manor  House  under  the  leadership  of  Richard 
Clyfton,  the  other  at  Gainsborough.  Whether  the  Gainsborough 
company  at  first  had  a  separate  pastor  is  uncertain,  but  within  a 
very  short  time,  at  least,  John  Smyth,  who  had  become  a  member 
of  this  congregation,  must  have  been  chosen  its  pastor.  Even  at 
this  early  period  Clyfton  and  Smyth  did  not  always  entirely 
agree,  for  it  is  known  that  before  they  left  England  differences 
had  broken  out  between  them,  and  a  "  conference  concerning 
excommunication  and  other  differences  then  betweene  you 
[Smyth]  &  me  [Clyfton]  was  held  "'\  The  two  churches  never- 
theless continued  to  be  so  closely  related  that  when  their 
troubles  became  unendurable,  "  by  a  joint  consent,  they  resolved 
to  go  into  the  Low  Countries,  where  they  heard  was  Freedom 
of  Religion  for  all  men".  From  Bradford's  narrative  it  also 
appears  that  the  separatists  tried  to  leave  England  in  the 
autumn  or  winter  of  1607  but  did  not  succeed  until  the  spring 
of  1608. 

Before  their  departure  they  evidently  sent  one  of  their 
number  over  to  Holland  to  report  the  condition  of  the  country, 
for  Bishop  Hall  had  heard  while  on  a  visit  to  the  Continent, 
"  that  certain  companies  from  the  parts  of  Nottingham  and 
Lincolne  (whose  Harbinger  had  beene  newly  in  Zeland  before 

^  Governor  Bradford's  "  History  '  Of  Plimoth  Plantation '.  From  the 
Original  Manuscript",  Boston,  1898,  p.  31. 

2  [Richard  Clyfton's]  "The  Plea  for  Infants",  Amsterdam,  1610,  p.  4. 


232  Early  English  Dissenters 

me  [him])  meant  to  retyre  themselves  to  Amsterdam,  for  their 
fulllibertie"^ 

The  two  companies  seem  to  have  reached  Amsterdam  about 
the  same  time,  and  evidently  intended  to  unite  under  the 
leadership  of  John  Smyth,  had  he  not  "broached"  certain 
"  opinions,  both  erronious  &  offensive  "I  Apparently  Smyth's 
congregation  from  the  beginning  maintained  a  separate  exist- 
ence from  Johnson's^  while  Clyfton's  company  may  have  joined 
Johnson's  church  and  remained  with  it  until  the  end  of  April, 
1609,  when  John  Robinson  with  most  of  the  original  members 
removed  to  Leyden^  At  first,  the  members  of  Smyth's  and  of 
Johnson's  companies  appear  to  have  been  in  communion  with 
one  another.     Later  this  relation  ceased. 

During  the  year  1608  events  moved  rapidly,  and  various 
disturbing  controversies  arose,  which  finally  resulted  in  the 
display  of  much  bitterness  and  in  the  parting  of  old  friends. 
Books  began  to  be  written  and  published  which  soon  told  to 
the  world  all  their  troubles,  but  which,  it  is  to  be  feared,  did 
little  toward  settling  their  many  difficulties ^ 

1  In  I.  H.[all]'s  "A  Common  Apologie  of  the  Church  of  England:...", 
London,  1610  [p.  125]. 

2  See  J.  Smyth's  "  Character  of  the  Beast",  1609,  p.  2. 

3  In  this  view  I  am  supported  by  Dr  Dexter's  judgment  as  expressed 
in  "The  True  Story  of  John  Smyth",  Boston,  1881,  [p.  2]  note  15,  in 
which  he  corrects  his  former  error. 

*  This  point  is  suggested  by  the  fact  that  Clyfton  took  Ainsworth's 
place  as  teacher  in  Johnson's  congregation  after  December,  1610,  and 
perhaps  by  a  statement  in  John  Dayrell's  "A  Treatise  of  the  Chvrch", 
1617,  p.  155,  where  it  is  said :  "  It  may  be  also  M.  Robinson  that  for 
this  cause,  you  your  selfe  haue  left  both  M.  Johnsons  Church  then  and 
M.  Ainsworths  also." 

5  Up  to  this  time  more  works  in  opposition  to  the  Brownists  had  either 
been  written  or  published  than  has  commonly  been  supposed.  Richard 
Bernard  in  his  "Christian  Advertisements",  London,  1608,  mentions  a 
number  of  these  writings  several  of  which,  I  believe,  are  at  present  not 
known:  "[P.  xi]  and  yet  Master  Oy shops  booke,  Master  Bradshawes 
challenge,  Doctor  Allisons  confutation,  certaine  Ministers  reioynder  to 
Master  Smith,  with  other  moe  are  not  answered..." 
"  [P.  32]  What  M.  Doctor  Allison,  M.  Cartwright,  M.  lames,  M.  Rogers, 
M.  Henrie  Sinith  and  others  moe,  haue  iudged  of  them  [the  Brownists], 
their  labours  being  extant  I  referre  men  thereto,..." 


The  first  English  Anabai^tist  Congregations    233 

Smyth's  third  work  was  a  little  octavo  book  published  in 
1607  and  entitled, "  PRINCIPLES  |  and  inferences  |  concerning  \ 
The  visible  Church  ".  Of  this  there  are  apparently  only  two 
copies  extant,  one  being  in  York  Minster  Library,  the  other, 
I  think,  in  the  Dexter  Collection  in  the  Library  of  Yale  Uni- 
versity. The  following  are  some  of  Smyth's  opinions  herein 
expressed : — 

A  visible  communion  of  Saincts  is  of  two,  three,  or  moe  Saincts 
joyned  together  by  covenant  with  God  &  themselve.s,  freely  to  vse 
al  the  holy  things  of  God,  according  to  the  word,  for  their  mutual 
edification,  &,  Gods  glory...' 

All  religious  societies  except  that  of  a  visible  church  ai-e  vn- 
lawful ;  as  Abbayes,  monasteries,  Nunries,  Cathedralls,  Collegiats, 
parishes. 

The  true  visible  church  is  the  narrow  way  that  leadeth  to  life 
which  few  find... 

Other  religious  communions  are  the  broad  way  that  leadeth  to 
destruction  which  many  find...^ 

The  outward  part  of  the  true  forme  of  the  true  visible  church 
is  a  vowe,  promise,  oath,  or  covenant  betwixt  God  and  the  Saints  : 
by  proportion  from  the  inward  forme  : . . . 

This  covenant  hath  2.  parts.  1.  respecting  God  and  the  faithful. 
2.  respecting  the  faithful  mutually... 

The  first  part  of  the  covenant  respecting  God  is  either  from  God 
to  the  faithful,  or  from  the  faithful  to  God... 

From  God  to  the  faithfull.  Mat.  22.  33.  the  sum  wherof  is 
expressed  2  Cor.  6.  16.     I  wilbe  their  God. 

From  the  faithful  to  God  2  Cor.  6.  1 6.  the  summe  whereof  is  to 
be  Gods  people,  that  is  to  obey  al  the  commandements  of  God. 
Deut.  29,  9[.] 

The  second  part  of  the  covenant  respecting  the  faithful  mutually 
conteyneth  all  the  duties  of  love  whatsoever...* 

Weomen  are  not  permitted  to  speak  in  the  church  in  tyme  of 
prophecy... 

If  women  doubt  of  any  thing  delivered  in  tyme  of  prophecy  and 
are  willing  to  learn,  they  must  ask  them  that  can  teach  them  in 
private,...* 

The  ofiicers  of  the  true  visible  church  are  al  absolutely  described 
in  the  word  of  God... 

These  officers  ar  of  two  sorts  :  1  Bishops,  2  Deacons  Phil.  I,  1. 

The  Bishops  are  also  called  Elders  or  Presbyters... 

The  Bishops  or  Elders  joyntly  together  are  called  the  Eldership 
or  Presbyterie... 

1  P.  8.  2  p,  9. 

3  P.  11,  incorrectly  printed  P.  10.  *  P.  14. 


234  Early  English  Dissenters 

The  Eldership  consisteth  of  3  sorts  of  persons  or  officers :  viz. 
the  Pastor,  Teacher,  Governours...^ 

It  should  also  be  said  that  about  one  third  of  the  contents 
of  this  little  treatise  (pp.  21-30)  is  made  up  of  a  discussion  of 
church  discipline. 

About  May  22,  1607,  one  Edward  James,  "Master  in  the 
Artes  and  Mynister  of  GODs  worde",  published  a  work,  of 
which  as  yet  I  have  seen  no  copy,  said  to  be  entitled,  "il 
retraite  sounded  to  certen  brethren  latelye  seduced  by  the  schis- 
maticall  Br  o  WNistes  to  forsake  the  Ghurche"  \  This  was  evidently 
directed  against  the  separatists  at  Scrooby  and  Gainsborough, 
and  its  date  of  publication  points  to  the  winter  or  early  spring 
of  1606/7  as  the  probable  time  of  their  covenanting.  Smyth 
in  his  "Paralleles,  Censvres,  Observations",  1609,  significantly 
mentions  a  "  Mr.  lames  "^  as  an  opponent  "  of  the  Seperation  ". 
No  doubt  this  was  Edward  James,  and  Smyth  had  evidently 
seen  his  book. 

Not  long  after  Smyth  had  published  the  previously  men- 
tioned "  litle  methode "  concerning  church  polity,  he  began 
writing  another  work,  which  appeared  in  1608  under  the  title, 
"  The  Differences  of  the  Churches  of  the  seperation  ".  In  this 
he  speaks  with  great  respect  of  "  the  auncient  brethren  of  the 
seperation  "  as  having  accomplished  much  to  restore  the  Church 
to  its  primitive  condition*,  and  on  the  same  page  he  also  gives 
an  unusual  text  of  the  church  covenant  of  the  separatists  at 
Scrooby  and  Gainsborough,  which  is  worth  noticing.  He  says  : 
"  it  is  our  covenant  made  with  our  God  to  forsake  every  evill 
way  whither  in  opinion  or  practise  that  shalbe  manifested  vnto 
vs  at  any  tyme  "*,  and  it  is  on  the  strength  of  this  covenant  that 
he  justifies  his  many  changes  of  mind.  In  fact,  Smyth  had 
already  begun  to  feel  that  though  the  members  of  the  "  Ancient 
Church  "  had  made  much  progress  in  determining  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  primitive  churches,  there  was  work  that  still  remained 
to  be  done  touching  "  the  Leitourgie  Presbyterie  &  Treasurie  of 

1  Pp.  17-18. 

2  See  Mr  Edward  Arber's  "Transcript  of  the  Registers  of  the  Company 
of  Stationers",  London,  Vol.  iii.,  1876,  p.  153. 

3  P.  127.  *  P.  iii.  ^  Ibid. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    235 

the  Church  ",  and  he  now  states  six  opinions  in  which  he  differs 
"  from  the  auncyent  brethren  of  the  Seperation  "^ : — 

1  Wee  hould  that  the  worship  of  the  new  testament  properly 
so  called  is  spirituall  proceeding  originally  from  the  hart :  &  that 
reading  out  of  a  booke  (though  a  lawfuU  eclesiastical  action)  is  no 
part  of  spiritnall  [spirituall]  worship,  but  rather  the  invention  of 
the  man  of  synne  it  beeing  substituted  for  a  part  of  spirituall 
worship. 

2  Wee  hould  that  seeing  prophesiing  is  a  parte  of  spirituall  worship : 
therefore  in  time  of  prophesijng  it  is  vnlawfuU  to  have  the  booke 
[i.e.,  the  Bible]  as  a  helpe  before  the  eye 

3  wee  hould  that  seeing  singinging  [sic]  a  psalme  is  a  parte  of 
spirituall  worship  therefore  it  is  vnlawfuU  to  have  the  booke  before 
the  eye  in  time  of  singinge  a  psalme 

4  wee  hould  that  the  Presbytery  of  the  church  is  vniforme  :  &  that 
the  triformed  Presbytetie  [Presbyterie]  consisting  of  thx'ee  kinds  of 
Elders  viz.  Pastors  Teachers  Rulers  is  none  of  Gods  Ordinance  but 
mans  devise. 

5  wee  hold  that  all  the  Elders  of  the  Church  are  Pastors:  and  that 
lay  Elders  (so  called)  are  Antichristiau  [Antichristian]. 

6  wee  hold  that  in  contributing  to  the  Church  Treasurie  their  ought 
to  bee  both  a  seperation  from  them  that  are  without  &  a  sanctifica- 
tion  of  the  whole  action  by  Prayer  &  Thanksgiving. 

These  statements  in  themselves  are  remarkable  enough,  but 
the  work  is  crammed  with  still  more  astonishing  views,  such  as 
modem  separatists  would  find  it  difficult  to  comprehend,  and 
much  more  difficult  to  put  into  practice.  Probably  this  book 
will  always  remain  one  of  the  curiosities  of  English  religious 
literature.  In  closing  Smyth  mentions  certain  questions  which 
he  has  not  yet  been  able  satisfactorily  to  answer.  Among  these 
are  the  following'^ : — 

Whither  in  a  Psalme  a  man  must  be  tyed  to  meter  &  Rithme,  & 
tune,  &  whither  voluntary  [sic]  be  not  as  necessary  in  tune  &  wordes 
as  in  matter  ? 

Whether  one  Elder  only  in  a  Church  be  Gods  ordinance  & 
whither  if  ther  be  chosen  any  Elder  ther  must  be  chosen  more  then 
one? 

Whither  the  seales  of  the  covenant  may  not  be  administred, 
ther  being  yet  no  Elders  in  office  ? 

The  exact  period  when  these  questions  were  most  disturbing 
the  separatists  is  determined  by  an  hitherto  unnoticed  letter  of 

1  P.  V.  2  [P.  34.] 


236  Early  English  Dissenters 

Thomas  Helwys  in  Lambeth  Palace  Library  ^  This  is  of  the 
date  Sept.  26,  1608,  and  is  given  in  the  volume  of  documents. 
In  the  letter  it  is  made  clear  that  Smyth's  congregation  did  not 
believe  in  having  "  Pastors  &  Teachers  ",  but  "  Pastors  only  ". 
Helwys  repeats :  "  we  approve  of  no  other  officers  in  the  ministry 
but  of  Pastors  ".  The  letter  is  unsigned,  but  is  marked  "A  note 
sent  by  [Thomas]  Ellwes  [Helwys]  one  of  thelders  of  the  Brown- 
est Churche  ",  thus  suggesting  that  the  congregation  already 
had  Elders.  The  letter  also  shows  that  by  Sept.  26,  1608, 
Smyth's  church  was  well  settled  in  Holland. 

In  an  undated  letter  of  "  Hughe  and  Anne  Bromheade  "  to 
their  cousin.  Sir  William  Hammerton,  evidently  written  in  the 
early  autumn  of  1608,  about  the  time  that  Helwys  sent  the 
above-mentioned  note,  is  the  following  quaint  description  of 
the  services  in  Smyth's  congregation-: — 

The  order  of  the  worshippe  and  goverment  of  oure  church  is 
.1.  we  begynne  with  A  prayer,  after  reads  some  one  or  tow  chapters 
of  the  bible  gyve  the  sence  therof,  and  conferr  vpon  the  same,  that 
done  we  lay  aside  oure  bookes,  and  after  a  solemne  prayer  made  by 
the  .1.  speaker,  he  propoundeth  some  text  owt  of  the  Scripture,  and 
prophecieth  owt  of  the  same,  by  the  space  of  one  hower,  or  thre 
Quarters  of  an  hower.  After  him  standeth  vp  A  .2.  speaker  and 
prophecieth  owt  of  the  said  text  the  like  tyme  and  space,  some 
tyme  more  some  tyme  lesse.  After  him  the  .3.  the  .4.  the  .5.  &c  as 
the  tyme  will  geve  leave.  Then  the  .1.  speaker  concludeth  with 
prayer  as  he  began  with  prayer,  with  an  exhortation  to  contribution 
to  the  poore,  which  collection  being  made  is  also  concluded  with 
prayer.  This  Morning  exercise  begynes  at  eight  of  the  clock[e?] 
and  continueth  vnto  twelve  of  the  clocke  the  like  course  of  exercise 
is  observed  in  the  aft[ei-]n[o]wne  from  .2.  of  the  clocke  vnto  .5.  or 
.6.  of  the  Clocke.  last  of  all  the  execution  of  the  g[over]ment 
of  the  church  is  handled  / 

Thus  far  Smyth  had  not  criticized  the  baptism  of  the 
separatists.  This  subject  was  probably  brought  to  his  eager 
attention  some  time  in  the  autumn  of  1608.  Having  become 
convinced  that  in  the  primitive  church  infants  were  not  baptized, 
he  came  to  the  conclusion  that  he  ought  to  be  baptized  again. 
The  problem  of  the  proper  manner  of  administering  baptism 

^  MS.  709,  fol.  117.     I  am  not  certain  that  this  letter  is  written  in 
Helwys'  own  hand-writing,  but  it  was  evidently  sent  by  him. 
2  Harl.  MS.  360,  fol.  71  recto. 


The  first  English  Ayiahaptist  Congregations    237 

seems  never  to  have  troubled  his  sensitive  mind.  His  chief 
difficulty  appears  rather  to  have  been  where  to  find  a  suitable 
person  to  baptise  him.  The  Mennonites  did  not  at  that  time  meet 
his  requirements  on  account  of  their  peculiar  beliefs.  To  whom 
then  should  he  turn  for  baptism,  for  he  demanded  an  administrator 
whose  own  baptism  had  been  such  that  no  one  could  with  fair- 
ness adversely  criticize  it  ?  To  his  disappointment  there  appeared 
to  be  no  such  person  in  all  the  world.  Even  the  Johnsonian 
Anabaptists  for  some  reason  did  not  suit  him,  though  he  seems 
to  have  followed  their  method  of  procedure  in  the  administration 
of  baptism  by  first  baptizing  himself  and  then  his  followers. 
This  fact  shows  that  Mr  Arber  made  much  too  strong  a  state- 
ment when  he  wrote  that  "In  the  year  1608,  John  Smyth 
baptized  himself;  and  so  became  the  Se-Baptist  of  Church 
History  "\  To  be  sure  Smyth  baptized  himself  late  in  1608,  or 
early  in  1609,  but,  as  we  have  already  seen,  he  was  neither  the 
first,  nor  the  only,  Se-Baptist. 

John  Smyth,  therefore,  is  not  such  an  unique  figure  in  church 
history  as  Dr  Dexter  and  Mr  Arber  would  have  us  believe.  In 
so  far  as  his  se-baptism  itself  is  concerned,  he  attempted  nothing 
original,  but  how  did  he  baptize  himself?  Fortunately  the 
following  contemporaneous  statements  when  linked  together 
leave  us  in  no  doubt  that  Smyth's  se-baptism  consisted  merely 
of  his  sprinkling  himself  with  water  from  a  basin  and  probably 
pronouncing  the  customary  baptismal  formula  : — 

M""  Smith,  M''  Helw:[ys]  &  the  rest  haveing  vtterly  dissolved,  & 
disclaymed  their  former  Ch:[urch]  state,  <fc  ministery,  came  together 
to  erect  a  new  Ch:[urch]  by  baptism  :  vnto  which  they  also  ascribed 
so  great  virtue,  as  that  they  would  not  so  much  as  pray  together, 
before  they  had  it.  And  after  some  streyning  of  courtesy,  who 
should  begin,... M""  Smith  baptized  first  himself,  &  next  M''  Helwis, 
&  so  the  rest,  making  their  particular  confessions  ^ 

Now  for  baptising  a  mans  self  ther  is  as  good  warrant,  as  for  a 
man  Churching  himself :  For  two  men  singly  are  no  Church,  joyntly 
they  are  a  Church,  &  they  both  of  them  put  a  Church  vppon  them- 
selves, so  may  two  men  put  baptisme  vppon  themselves  :  For  as 
both   those   persons   vnchurched,   yet   have   powre   to  assume  the 

1  "The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  London,  1897,  p.  137. 

2  John  Robinson's  "  Of  Religious  Communion  Private  and  Publique ", 
1617,  p.  48. 


238  Early  English  Dissenters 

Church  each  of  them  for  himself  with  others  in  communion:  So 
each  of  them  vnbaptized  hath  powre  to  assume  baptisme  for  himself 
in  communion ;  And  as  Abraham  &  lohn  Baptist,  &  all  the  Proselites 
after  Abrahams  example,  Exod.  12.  48.  did  administer  the  Sacrament 
vppon  themselves :  So  may  any  man  raised  vp  after  the  Apostacy  of 
Antichrist,  in  the  recovering  of  the  Church  by  baptisme,  administer 
it  vppon  himselr  [himself]  in  communion  with  others.-...^ 

Mr.  Sm.[yth]  anabaptised  himself  with  water:  but  a  child  could 
have  done  the  like  unto  himself,  who  cannot  performe  any  part  of 
spirituall  worship  :  therefore  Mr.  Sm.[yth]  anabaptising  himself  with 
water,  did  no  part  of  spirituall  worship  :  and  consequently  it  was 
carnal  worship,  and  service  of  the  Divil.  If  he  answer,  that  a  child 
though  he  could  cast  water  on  himself,  &  utter  such  words  as  he 
heard  Mr.  Sm.[yth]  speak  withal ;  yet  could  he  not  preach  or  open  the 
covenant  as  did  the  Preists  and  Levits,  Nehem.  8.  8.  and  as  Christ 
himself  did  when  he  read  in  the  synagogue,  Luk.  4.  Wherefore 
reading  and  preaching  being  joyned  togither,  as  baptising  with 
water  &  preaching :  he  that  condemns  the  one  outward  action 
because  a  child  can  doe  it,  condemneth  also  the  other  by  the  like 
reason.  And  Mr.  Sm.[yth]  having  thus  written  of  children,  and 
doon  to  himself ;  the  babes  and  sucklings  whose  soules  he  would 
murder  by  depriving  them  of  the  covenant  promise  and  visible  seal 
of  salvation  in  the  Church ;  shal  rise  up  in  judgment  &  shall  con- 
demn him  in  the  day  of  Christ^ 

With   the   preceding  citations   the   following   words   from 
Bishop  Hall's  "  A  Common  Apologie  of  the  Chvrch  of  England: 
... ",  1610,  should  probably  be  joined : — 
shew  you  mee,  where  the  Apostles  baptized  in  a  Basen*. 

From  this  group  of  quotations  we  may  get  a  very  good  idea 
of  how  Smyth's  congregation  was  organized,  and  of  the  manner 
in  which  he  baptized  himself  and  those  who  were  willing  to 
follow  him. 

As  may  well  be  imagined,  Smyth  was  soon  in  the  midst  of  a 
still  more  heated  controversy.  Mr  Arber  and  others  have  given 
considerable  attention  to  the  works  relating  to  it,  and  we  have 
no  time  to  mention  them  except  in  so  far  as  they  furnish  us 
with  the  opinions  and  practices  of  Smyth's  company.  By  thus 
boldly  rejecting  the  baptism  of  the  Church  of  England  and 
seeking  rebaptism  Smyth  does  not  appear  to  have  displeased 
Bishop  Hall,  but  he  set  all  the  Brownists  and  Barrowists  by 

1  John  Smyth's  "The  Character  of  the  Beast",  1609,  p.  58. 

2  Henry  Aiusworth's  "A  Defence  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  Worship  and 
Ministerie,...",  Amsterdam,  1609,  p.  69.  ^  p^  91, 


The  first  Eiiglish  Anabaptist  Congregations    239 

the  ears,  and  they  became  exceedingly  active  in  striving  to 
defend  their  cause,  which  Smyth  seemed  suddenly  to  have 
undermined.  He  was  accordingly  soon  at  work  on  his  book 
directed  against  infant  baptism,  which  he  entitled,  "THE 
CHARACTER  OF  THE  BEAST",  1609,  and  which  he 
finished  writing  on  Mar.  24,  1608/9.  In  "The  Epistle  to  the 
Reader"  he  goes  so  far  as  to  claim  that  "al  that  shal  in  tyme  to 
come  Seperate  from  England  must  Seperate  from  the  baptisme 
of  England,  &  if  they  wil  not  Seperate  from  the  baptisme  of 
England  their  is  no  reason  why  they  should  seperate  from 
England  as  from  a  false  Church  "S  "  though  they  may  seperate 
for  corruptions  "I  In  closing,  Smyth  speaks  of  believers' 
baptism  as  the  "  most  evident  truth  that  ever  was  revealed  to 
me  [him] ". 

It  was  soon  manifest  that  if  this  last  view  was  true,  it  would 
overturn  the  existing  opinions  of  all  Christendom,  even  in- 
cluding those  maintained  by  the  orthodox  Church  of  England, 
by  the  Puritans,  and  by  the  Brownists  and  Barrowists. 

Smyth  maintained  his  position  in  the  following  manner. 

He  says': — 

baptisme  in  Popery  is  false  baptisme,  &  so  in  the  Lords  account  no 
better  then  Pagan  washing,  being  administred  vppon  infants  a 
subject  that  God  never  appointed  to  baptisme:... 
[In  contradistinction  from  baptism  of  infants  which  Smyth  looks 
upon  as  false  in  essence]  the  Scripture  describeth  true  baptisme 
which  is  the  Lords  owne  ordinance  thus  :  The  matter  must  bee  one 
that  confesseth  his  Fayth  &  his  sinnes,  one  that  is  regenerate  & 
borne  againe  :  The  forme  must  bee  a  voluntary  delivering  vp  of  the 
party  baptized  into  the  Name  of  the  Father,  Sonne,  &  Holy  Spirit, 
by  washing  with  water,  Mat.  28.  19.  Mat.  3.  6.  John.  4.  1.  Act.  2.  41, 
&  8.  36.  37.  compared  with  Roman.  6.  17.  &  Mat.  28.  20.  &  18.  20. 
&  Gal.  3.  27.  &  Roman.  6.  2-6.  Wherein  ther  must  be  a  mutual 
consent  of  both  persons  contracting  together  :  &  that  this  is  so,  the 
forme  of  baptisme  retayned  in  popery  yet,  teacheth  plainly  :  wher 
they  say.  Credis  ?  Credo  :  Abrenuntias  1  abrenuntio  :  which  other 
persons  speak  for  the  infant  that  cannot  speak,  therby  declaring 
that  ther  must  needs  bee  a  mutual  contract  of  both  the  parties  con- 
tracting :  This  ordinance  of  the  L.[ord]  therfor  is  abolished  both  in 
the  matter  &  forme,  &  an  other  straunge  invention  of  man  is  in  the 
rome  therof  substituted,  which  is  not  the  L.[ords]  &  therfor  a 
nullity,...* 

1  P.  iv.  2  Ibid.  3  P.  48.  *  Pp.  50-1. 


240  Early  English  Dissenters 

This  passage  and  another  on  page  48  show  that  Smyth  still 

believed  in  the  use  of  a  covenant  in  the  organization  of  a 

Christian  church.     His  strong  attack  on  the  position  of  the 

Barrowists  seems  to  have  affected  some  of  them  even  before 

March  24,  1608/9,  when  he  finished  "The  Character  of  the 

Beast",  for  he  says: — 

why  may  not  you  [Richard  Clyfton]  retume  back  againe  into  Eng- 
land, &  take  vp  your  former  ministery,  &  renounce  your  Schisme 
which  you  have  made ?  &  so  I  heare  that  some  are  mynded  to  doe  :..} 

Of  the  works  written  in  this  controversy  against  the  English 
Anabaptists  so  much  has  already  been  said,  that  mention  need 
only  be  made  of  one,  of  which  it  appears  no  notice  has  yet  been 
taken.  It  is  a  little  duodecimo  work  of  twenty-four  pages 
written  by  Francis  Johnson  and  published  in  1609,  entitled, 
"  A  BRIEF  TREATISE  |  conteyning  some  grounds  and  |  reasons, 
against  two  errours  |  of  the  Anabaptists :  |  1.  The  one,  concern- 
ing baptisme  \  of  infants.  \  2.  The  other,  concerning  anaba-\ 
ptisme  of  elder  people.  \  ..." 

In  Holland  it  has  been  thought  that  the  se-baptism  occurred 
in  November,  1608.  My  own  view  is  that  before  that  date 
Smyth  could  hardly  have  had  time  to  change  his  opinions  so 
greatly.  December,  1608,  or  January,  1608/9,  seems  a  more 
likely  time,  and  would  also  have  given  him  sufficient  opportunity 
before  Mar.  24,  1608/9,  to  write  "The  Character  of  the  Beast". 

Another  treatise  from  Smyth's  pen  was  published  later 
in  1609  before  he  changed  his  ideas  on  the  necessity  of 
observing  a  succession  in  the  ministry.  This  work  was  en- 
titled "  PARALLELES,  CENSVRES,  OBSERVATIONS."  It 
breathes  no  suggestion  of  any  new,  sudden  change  of  mind,  and 
all  seems  calm  in  so  far  as  his  relations  with  his  congregation 
are  concerned.  Here,  however,  he  makes  no  slight  prophecy 
with  regard  to  church  buildings,  when  he  says,  "that  as  the 
goodly  buildings  of  the  Abbayes,  Monasteries,  &  Nunries,  are 
already  destroyed,  &  made  barnes,  stables,  swinestyes,  jakes,  so 
shal  it  be  done  with  al  the  Idol  Temples  [i.e.,  church  edifices 
in  which  images,  etc.,  had  stood]  when  the  howre  of  their 
visitation  shal  come:..."^ 

1  P.  61.  2  p.  122. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Co7igregations    241 

Smyth's  opinion  of  the  value  of  the  Church  of  England  is 
nevertheless  by  no  means  so  poor  at  this  time  as  one  might 
expect : — 

I  for  my  part  do  professe  that  in  your  assemblies  [of  the  Church  of 
England]  I  receaved  the  seedes  of  true  faith  invisible,  which  (if  I 
had  dyed  not  knowing  the  Seperation)  should  I  doubt  not  through 
Gods  mercy  have  been  effectual  to  my  justification  &  salvation  in 
Christ  .-...1 

From  Bishop  Hall^  we  learn  that  in  Smyth's  congregation 
of  Anabaptists,  women  were  allowed  at  the  Lord's  table,  the 
Communion  was  celebrated  in  the  evening,  and  the  minister 
preached  over  a  table.  All  these  customs  seemed  remarkable 
to  Bishop  Hall,  and  he  claimed  that  no  warrant  for  any  of 
them  could  be  found  in  the  primitive  church ! 

Before  March  12,  1609/10,  Smyth  was  encountering  further 
troubles,  this  time  with  some  of  his  own  congregation  concern- 
ing succession  in  the  ministry,  and  all  those  who  did  not 
agree  with  him  promptly  withdrew  from  the  church*.  This 
unexpected  movement  was  apparently  led  by  the  Elders,  who 
may  have  been  Thomas  Helwys,  William  Pigott,  Thomas  Seamer, 
and  John  Murton. 

This  unfortunate  situation  will  be  made  more  clear  by  the 
following  citation  from  Smyth's  "  last  booke  " : — 

Succession  is  the  matter  wherin  I  hold  as  I  haue  written  to  maister 
Bernard  /  that  succession  is  abolished  by  the  church  of  Rome  /  and 
that  ther  is  no  true  ministery  deriued  from  the  Apostels  through 
the  church  of  Rome  to  England  /  but  that  the  succession  is  inter- 
rupted and  broken  of  :  Secondly  I  hold  as  I  did  hould  then  / 
succession  being  broken  of  and  interrupted  /  it  may  by  two  or 
three  gathered  together  in  the  name  of  Christ  /  be  renewed  and 

*  "Paralleles,  Censvres,  Observations",  1609,  p.  131. 

2  In  "A  Common  Apologie  of  the  Chvrch  of  England",  London,  1610, 
p.  91. 

3  Up  to  the  present  time  it  has  generally  been  supposed  that  the  church 
took  the  very  unusual  course  of  casting  Smyth  out.  It  now  appears  from 
words  in  Smyth's  "  last  booke  ",  where  he  speaks  of  "  maister  Helwys  his 
seperation  /  against  which  I  have  done  nothing  in  writing  hitherto  ",  that 
Helwys  and  his  followers  took  the  more  natural  step  of  separating  from 
Smyth.  On  the  other  hand,  see  also  the  contents  of  MS.  B.  1351  in  the 
Mennonite  Archives,  Amsterdam,  given  in  the  volume  of  documents. 

B.  16 


242  Early  English  Dissenters 

assumed  againe :  and  hearin  ther  is  no  difference  betwixt  maister 
Helwis  and  me.  Thirdly  maister  Hel.[wis]  saith  that  although  ther 
be  churches  alreadie  established  /  ministers  ordained  /  and  sacra- 
ments administred  orderly  /  yet  men  are  not  bound  to  loyne  to 
those  former  churches  established  /  but  may  being  as  yet  vnbaptized 
baptise  them  selues  (as  we  did)  and  proceed  to  build  churches  of 
them  selues  /  disorderly  (as  I  take  it)  Herin  I  differ  from  maister 
Helwis  /  and  therfor  he  saith  I  Haue  sinned  against  the  holy  ghost, 
bicause  I  once  acknowledged  the  truth  (as  M"".  Helwis  calleth  yt:) 
here  I.  answer  ,3.  things  1.  I  did  never  acknowledge  it.  2.  it  is  not 
the  truth.  3.  though  I  had  acknowledged  it  /  and  it  were  a  truth  / 
yet  in  denying  it  I  haue  not  synned  against  the  holie  ghost,  first 
I  did  never  acknowledge  yt  /  that  it  was  lawfull  for  priuate  persons 
to  baptise  /  when  their  were  true  churches  and  ministers  /  from 
where  wee  might  haue  our  baptisme  without  synne  /  as  ther  are  40. 
witnesses  that  can  testifie :  onlie  this  is  It  which  I  held  /  that 
seeing  ther  was  no  church  to  whome  wee  could  loyne  with  a  Good 
conscience  /  to  haue  baptisme  from  them  /  therfor  wee  might  baptise 
our  selues  :  that  this  is  so  the  lord  knoweth  /  my  conscience  wit- 
nesseth  /  and  maister  Helwis  him  self  will  not  deny  it.  secondly  it 
is  not  the  truth  that  two  or  three  priuate  persons  may  baptise  / 
when  ther  is  a  true  church  and  ministers  established  whence 
baptisme  may  orderlie  be  had  :  For  if  Christ  himself  did  fetch 
his  baptisme  from  lohn  /  and  the  gentills  from  the  lewes  baptised  / 
and  if  God  be  the  God  of  order  and  not  of  confusion  /  then  surely 
wee  must  obserue  this  order  now  /  orels  dt[s]order  is  order  /  and 
God  alloweth  disorder,  for  if  M"".  Helwis  position  be  true  /  that 
everie  two  or  three  /  that  see  the  truth  of  baptisme  may  beginne  to 
baptise  /  and  need  not  loyne  to  former  true  churches  /  wher  they 
may  haue  ther  baptisme  orderly  from  ordained  ministers :  then  the 
order  of  the  primitiue  church  /  was  order  for  them  and  those  times 
onely  /  and  this  discorder  will  establish  baptisme  of  priuate  persons  / 
Yea  of  women  from  hence  forth  to  the  worldes  end  / 


About  February,  1609/10,  thirty-two  of  the  Smyth  party 
(there  appear  to  have  been  forty-three  in  all),  finding  them- 
selves friendless  in  a  cold  world,  appealed  to  the  Waterlanders,  a 
section  of  the  Mennonites,  that  they  might  be  allowed  to  unite 
with  them,  as  those  whom  they  were  now  willing  to  recognize 
as  the  "  true  church  of  Christ ".  On  hearing  of  this  new  and 
somewhat  surprising  movement,  Helwys'  followers  seem  to  have 
had  a  conference  with  the  Waterlanders,  in  order  to  prevent 
them  from  receiving  Smyth's  company.  At  this  meeting,  how- 
ever, the  English  were  not  able  to  express  their  views  in  Dutch 
with    facility  "for   want   of   speach ".     Hence   on    March    12, 


The  first  English  Anabajttist  Congregations    243 

1609/10,  they  wrote  a  letter  in  English  to  the  Waterlanders 
deploring  their  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  Dutch  language,  and 
urging  them  to  be  slow  in  receiving  Smyth  and  his  associates 
into  membership. 

The  troubles  of  the  English  Anabaptists  were  quickly  known 
and  reported  to  the  world.  Richard  Clyfton  in  his  "  Plea  for 
Infants  and  Elder  People",  Amsterdam,  1610,  says^: — 

And  now  againe,  many  of  this  new  communion  have  separated 
themselves  from  the  rest,  holding  the  error  about  the  incarnation 
of  Christ.  An  other  sort  are  excommunicate,  namely  M.  Smyth  & 
divers  with  him,  for  holding  (as  it  is  reported  by  some  that  were  of 
them)  that  their  new  washed  companie  is  no  true  church,  and  that 
there  cannot  be  in  a  church  the  administration  of  baptisme  »fe  other 
ordinances  of  Christ,  without  Officers,  contrarie  to  his  former 
judgment,  practise  &  writings,  &  yet  resteth  not  but  is  inquiring 
after  a  new  way  of  walking,  (as  the  same  persons  affirme)  breeding 
more  errors,  as  is  strongly  suspected,  and  by  his  manuscripts  partly 
appeares. 

It  has  long  been  known  that  John  Smyth's  original  church 
of  Anabaptists  was  early  divided  into  two  sections  led  re- 
spectively by  Smyth  and  by  Helwys,  but  hitherto  it  seems 
largely  to  have  escaped  observation  that  already  by  1610  his 
congregation  had  in  reality  separated  into  three,  and  not  two, 
distinct  parties.  The  above  citation  shows  that  the  third  com- 
pany "  had  separated  themselves  from  the  rest,  holding  the  error 
about  the  incarnation  of  Christ ",  in  other  words,  having  accepted 
at  least  one  of  the  opinions  maintained  by  the  Continental 
Anabaptists,  which  was  not  acceptable  either  to  Smyth  or  to 
Helwys  and  Murton. 

This  third  company  of  English  Anabaptists  I  judge  included 
Leonard  Busher,  who  is  spoken  of  in  1611  as  belonging  to  a 
class  of  Anabaptists  distinct  from  Smyth  as  well  as  from 
Helwys^  Associated  with  Busher  may  have  been  Swithune 
Grindall,  Richard  Overton,  John  Drew  (who  later  united  with 

1  Sig.  *3  verso. 

2  In  the  following  citation  from  a  letter  written  by  "  Mat.  Savnders ' 
and  "Cvth.  Hvtten"  on  July  8,  1611,  the  different  English  Anabaptist 
sections  of  this  early  period  may  be  quite  clearly  made  out : — 

"Master  Smith  an  Anabaptist  of  one  sort,  and  master  Helwise  of 

16—2 


244  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  Waterlanders),  and  probably  others  with  whose  names  we 
are  not  familiar  to-day. 

Those  of  Smyth's  party  who  first  applied  for  membership 
among  the  Waterlanders  were  the  following  thirty-two^ : — 

Hugh  Bromhead.  Anne  Bromhead. 

lervase  Neville  lane  South  worth, 

lohn  Smyth.  Mary  Smyth. 

Thomas  Canadyne.  loane  Halton. 

Edward  Hankin.  Ales  Arnefield. 

lohn  Hardy.  Isabell  Thomson. 

Thomas  Pygott.  Margaret  Stavely. 

Francis  Pygott.  Mary  Grindall. 

Robert  Stavely.  Mother  Pygott. 

Alexander  Fleming.  Ales  Pygott. 

Alexander  Hodgkin.  Margaret  Pygott. 

lohn  Grindall.  Betteris  Dickenson. 

Salomon  Thomson.  Mary  Dickenson. 

Samuell  Halton.  Ellyn  Paynter. 

Thomas  Dolphin.  Ales  Parsons. 

loane  Briggs. 

lane  Organ. 

Later  the  number  was  considerably  increased. 

Latin  communications  now  began  to  be  sent  to  the  Water- 
landers by  both  parties.  Smyth  wrote  with  his  own  hand  a 
twenty-article  Confession  of  Faith  for  their  perusal,  while 
Helwys  and  Murton  sent  them  a  letter  in  Latin,  protesting 
that    the    Waterlanders   should   not   receive   Smyth   and   his 

another,  and  master  Busker  of  another to  speake  nothing  of  Pedder, 

Henrie  Martin,  with  the  rest  of  those  Anabaptists...'^ 

("The  Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists"  by 
Christopher  Lavvne  and  three  others,  1612,  p.  56.) 

Busher  was  evidently  connected  with  the  third  section  of  Smyth's 
congregation,  but  whether  before  the  separation  may  be  questioned. 
I  do  not  find  his  name  in  any  of  the  Smyth  papers.  Pedder  [Pidder], 
Martin,  and  their  followers  are  looked  upon  as  quite  distinct  from  the 
three  Smyth  groups. 

'  MS.  B.  1347  in  the  Mennonite  Archives,  Amsterdam. 

2  Nevill  later  renounced  his  Anabaptism. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    245 

followers,  and  a  Confession  of  Faith  in  nineteen  articles,  in 
which  they  speak  of  themselves  as  the  "  true  Christian  English 
church  ". 

Evidently  some  of  the  Waterlanders,  who  were  favourably 
disposed  to  the  English,  suggested  that  if  a  union  were  to  take 
place,  they  must  first  accept  the  Confession  of  Lubbert  Gerrits 
and  Hans  de  Ries.  Accordingly  an  English  translation  of  it  in 
thirty-eight  articlesS  entitled,  "A  short  confession  of  fayth",  was 
drawn  up  and  signed  by  forty-three  English  persons.  Two  of  the 
names  at  the  bottom  of  the  first  column  are  practically  illegible, 
and  so  many  mistakes  of  one  kind  and  another  have  been  made 
concerning  various  names  in  the  list,  that  it  may  now  be  given 
in  full.  Fourteen  of  the  names  (as  indicated  in  the  volume  of 
documents)  including  those  of  John  Smyth  and  Hugh  [and 
Anne]  Bromhead  have  been  crossed  out,  which  probably  means 
that  before  the  English  were  finally  admitted  to  membership 
by  the  Waterlanders  in  1615,  those  whose  names  are  crossed 
out  had  either  died,  returned  to  England,  or  again  changed 
their  beliefs.     The  following  is  the  list^: — 

lohn  Smyth.  Garuase  Neuile./ 

Hugo  [?]  Bromhead  Elizabeth  Tomson 

his  wife  X  lohn  Grindall  Mother  Pigott. 

Thomas  Cannadine  [?]*  Mary  Smyth 

Samuel  Halton  lane  southworth 

Thomas  Pigott  Margarett  Stavely. 

lohn  Hardie  Isabell  [?]  Thomson. 

Edward  hankin  [?]  lane  Organ. 

Thomas  lesopp*  Mary  Dickens. 

Robert  Staveley  Betteris  Dickens. 

*  Arts.  19  and  22  (Dutch)  were  omitted  (McGlothlin's  "Baptist  Con- 
fessions", London,  p.  54). 

2  MS.  B.  1352  in  the  Mennonite  Archives,  Amsterdam. 

3  Thomas  Canadyne  had  been  a  member  of  Greenwood's  congregation 
in  1590,  and  evidently  migrated  to  Amsterdam  with  the  other  church 
members  about  1593. 

*  Thomas  Jessop  is  mentioned  as  a  Brownist  in  the  Records  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Court  of  York  under  the  date,  July  26,  1607  [?]  (see  Dr  John 
Waddington's  "Congregational  Hiatory",  1567-1700,  Loudon,  1874,  p.  163). 


246  Early  English  Dissenters 

Allexander  fleeminge  [?]  Dorottie  Hamand. 

lohn  Amfeld  Ellin  [?]  Paynter 

Fraunces  Pigott  Anne  Broomhead 

Thomas  Dolphin  Ales  Parsons. 

Salomon  Thomson.  loane  Houghton. 

Alexander  Hodgkin  loane  Brigges 

Vrsulay  Bywater  Ales  Pigott. 

dorethie  Oakland  Margarett  Pigott 

lohn  Ales  Arnefield. 

Elizabeth  White 

Dorethie  Tomson 
Margaret  Maurice 

But  while  some  of  the  Waterlanders  were  evidently  in  favour 
of  a  union  with  the  English  Anabaptists  under  the  leadership  of 
John  Smyth,  others  were  not,  as  may  be  seen  in  several  letters 
sent  in  April,  May,  and  July,  1610,  in  which  any  haste  in  the 
proceedings  is  discouraged,  and  it  is  suggested  that  the  Men- 
nonites  in  other  parts  of  Holland,  as  well  as  in  Amsterdam,  and 
even  in  "Prussia"  and  "Germany",  should  be  consulted  concern- 
ing such  an  important  matter,  so  that  there  might  be  complete 
peace  and  unity  among  them.  Accordingly,  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  as  much  information  as  possible  to  the  congregations 
outside  of  Amsterdam,  a  Dutch  translation  of  the  "  Epistle  to 
the  Reader  "  of  Smyth's  "  Character  of  the  Beast "  appears  to 
have  'been  made.  This  is  still  preserved  in  the  Mennonite 
Archives. 

What  happened  to  Smyth's  followers  after  they  had  been 
deserted  by  Helwys  and  Murton,  and  after  their  application  to 
the  Waterlanders  had  been  passed  over,  is  not  quite  clear. 
It  is  probable  that  they  kept  together  and  held  meetings 
of  their  own,  but  it  is  also  apparent  that  they  attended  the 
services  of  the  Waterlanders,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  following 
passage  from  Helwys'  "An  Advertisement  or  Admonition", 
1611^:— 

when  he  [John  Smyth]  had  himself  but  a  little  vnderstanding  of 
your  [the  Dutch]  language,  and  the  rest  of  his  confedracie,  when 

1  P.  37. 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    247 

some  of  them  had  not  anie  vnderstanding  to  be  spoken  of,  and 
divers  none  at  all,  neither  yet  [in  1611]  have  :  have,  and  do 
come  to  worshipp  with  you,  being  Barbarians  vnto  you  and  say 
Amen  (els  what  do  they  there)  not  knowing  whether  you  blesse  or 
curse. 

Thus  the  years  1610  and  1611  passed.  Smyth  produced  no 
more  controversial  works,  but  during  this  period  Helwys  seems 
to  have  been  constantly  engaged  in  writing,  for  in  1611  and 
1612  no  less  than  four  books  were  published  by  him,  including 
a  Confession  of  Faith  of  his  congregation,  to  which  we  shall 
refer  later.  To  this  Confession  of  Faith  Smyth's  company 
apparently  prepared  as  an  answer  a  corresponding  Confession, 
finally  composed  of  one  hundred  articles.  Probably  this  was 
originally  drafted  in  English,  but  a  Dutch  copy  must  have  been 
quickly  drawn  up  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  Waterlanders.  At 
any  rate,  in  the  Mennonite  Archives  there  are  two  slightly 
var3ang  Dutch  copies  of  this  Confession.  One  of  them  consists 
of  101,  and  the  other  of  102,  articles,  but,  with  one  exception, 
they  apparently  contain  almost  exactly  the  same  text.  The 
former  is  in  quarto  format,  is  evidently  the  earlier  copy,  and  is 
not  so  nicely  written.  The  second  is  in  folio  and  beautifully 
executed.  As  later  published  in  English,  the  Confession  is 
probably  in  its  best  and  final  form  in  so  far  as  the  text  is 
concerned,  though  some  of  the  Scripture  references  may  contain 
typographical  errors.  Of  course  the  Dutch  copies  were  not 
published,  but  were  intended  only  for  private  examination  and 
therefore  have  no  "Epistle  to  the  reader", as  does  the  published 
English  text.  In  general  the  second  Dutch  copy  and  the 
English  agree,  except  for  slight  additions  or  alterations  in  the 
wording,  and  some  changes  in  the  numbering  and  arrangement 
of  the  articles  ^ 

1  Most  of  these  differences  may  be  mentioned  here.  The  order  of 
articles  25  and  26  of  the  English  edition  is  transposed  in  the  Dutch ; 
article  28  of  the  English  forms  article  30  in  the  Dutch ;  article  28  in  the 
Dutch  becomes  article  31  in  the  English ;  article  30  in  the  English  does 
not  appear  in  the  Dutch;  the  text  of  article  31  in  the  English  after 
"  Rom.  13"  is  evidently  not  in  the  Dutch  ;  art.  32  in  the  English  is  art.  33 
in  the  Dutch ;  art.  33  in  the  English  is  art.  31  in  the  Dutch ;  art.  34  in 
the  English  is  art.  32  in  the  Dutch ;  art.  35  in  the  EugHsh  is  art.  34  in 


248  Early  English  Dissenters 

Smyth  had  long  been  of  consumptive  tendency,  and  in  the 
summer  of  1612  he  grew  rapidly  weaker  and  died  at  the  end  of 
August  in  that  year.  He  was  buried  in  the  Niewe  Kerk  on 
Sept.  1.  Not  long  after  his  death  there  was  published  by 
T.[homas  ?]  P.[ygott  ?]  a  little  volume  consisting  of  three  parts, 
including  the  previously  mentioned  Confession  of  Faith  of  one 
hundred  articles  prefaced  by  a  short  Epistle.  The  title-page 
of  the  only  existing  copy  of  this  work,  which  is  in  York  Minster 
Library,  is  wanting,  but  fortunately  the  whole  of  the  text  has 
been  preserved.  The  first  section  is  called  "  Propositions  and 
conclusions,  concerning  true  Christian  religion,  conteyning  a 
confession  of  faith  of  certaine  English  people,  liuinge  at  Amster- 
dam ".  Then  come  "  The  last  booke  of  lohn  Smith,  Called  the 
retractation  of  his  errours,  and  the  confirmation  of  the  truth",  and 
a  short  account  by  Pygott  of  "The  Life  and  Death  of  lohn 
Smith ".  Smyth  manifests  a  truly  beautiful  spirit  in  these 
last  two  sections,  and  a  perusal  of  them  probably  made  Bishop 
Creighton,  while  Regius  Professor  of  Modern  History  at  Cam- 
bridge, pay  Smyth  the  unexpected  tribute,  that  "  None  of  the 

the  Dutch;  art.  36  in  the  English  is  art.  35  in  the  Dutch  with  a  few 
changes ;  articles  44  and  45  in  the  Dutch  become  art.  45  in  the  English ; 
the  Dutch  text  has  an  article  52  which  apparently  is  not  in  the  English, 
and  which  reads  as  follows  : — 

"52. 
"  Dat  lesus  ChristQs  aldus  is  geworden  een  Middelaerdes  [sic]  des  [sic] 
nieflwen  Testaments  te  weeten  koninck  prister  ende  propheet  otter  sijn 
gemeente  ende  dat  de  wedergeboornen  aldtts  door  hem  geestelijcke  koningen 
ende  pro^^heeten  geworden  sijn-  apo.  1.  6.     1  loh.  2.  20  apo.  19.  20." 

Then  for  some  articles  the  numbering  of  the  Dutch  is  one  ahead  of  the 
English.  Again  the  Dutch  articles  59  and  60  become  art.  58  in  the  English, 
and  art.  59  in  the  English  is  art.  61  in  the  Dutch.  Art.  64  (English)  =  art. 
67  (Dutch) ;  art.  65  (Eng.)  =  art,  66  (Dutch)  except  for  a  few  words  added 
at  the  end  of  the  Dutch  text;  art.  66  (Eng.)  =  art.  68  (Dutch),  and  from 
here  the  numbering  of  the  English  articles  is  two  behind  that  of  the 
Dutch.  The  English  article  79  has  two  or  three  more  Scriptiu-e  references 
at  the  end  than  the  corresponding  Dutch  article ;  the  Dutch  article  corre- 
sponding to  the  English  article  numbered  81  adds  a  few  words ;  and  finally 
the  Dutch  article  98  (Eng.  96)  adds  at  the  end  the  words :  "  maer  of  het 
nuter  tijt  den  gemeente  geopenbaert  is  of  niet  daer  en  derven  [durven] 
wy  niet  seeckers  van  seggen." 


The  first  English  Anabaptist  Congregations    249 

English  Separatists  had  a  finer  mind  or  a  more  beautiful  soul 
than  John  Smith  "^ 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  because  this  last  work  of 
Smyth's  is  called  "the  retractation  of  his  errours",  that  he 
deserted  his  little,  loyal  company  at  the  end.  His  retractation, 
on  the  contmry,  was  of  a  somewhat  different  order,  and  consisted 
rather  in  his  giving  up  his  censorious  habits  in  controversy, 
and  in  no  longer  answering  the  works  written  against  him,  both 
because  he  knew  they  would  only  breed  further  strife,  and  also 
because  he  had  no  further  means  with  which  to  publish  his 
writings. 

In  fact,  his  whole  attitude  toward  the  world  had  been 
modified  by  hard  experience.  He  now  saw  that  it  was  a  waste 
of  time  to  be  fighting  about  "  the  outward  church  and  Cere- 
monies ",  and  that  such  differences  should  "  not  cause  me  [him] 
to  refuse  the  brotherhood  of  anie  penitent  and  faithfull  Christian 
whatsoever  ",  a  remarkably  enlightened  statement  for  his  day. 
In  this  respect  then  he  had  changed  greatly.  He  had  not 
returned  to  the  Church  of  England,  or  deserted  his  own  little 
company,  but  he  had  begun  to  see  that  in  all  churches,  and 
irrespective  of  church,  there  are  good  men,  and  that  further 
separation,  and  the  striving  after  greater  perfection  of  church  or- 
ganization were  not  the  chief  points  to  be  emphasized.  T.[homas] 
P.[ygott]  reports  that  Smyth  on  his  death-bed  said:  "if  I  Hue... 
I  will  walke  with  no  other  people  /  but  you  /  all  my  daies :  he 
desired  his  wyfe  also  so  to  doe  /  being  perswaded  that  shee 
would :  and  wished  that  his  children  should  remayne  with  us  ", 
— final  messages,  eloquent  of  the  faith  to  which  he  still  firmly 
clung. 

Though  the  attempt  of  Smyth's  congregation  to  join  the 
Waterlanders  in  1610  was  frustrated,  the  hope  that  such  a  union 
would  take  place  had  not  been  given  up  by  "Lubbert  gerretsz", 
and  on  Jan.  17,  1612  (New  Style),  or  Jan.  7,  1611  (Old  Style), 
as  he  lay  in  bed  very  ill  he  summoned  all  the  Waterland 
ministers,  including  "  hans  de  Rijs  /  Ian  munter  [who  owned  the 
Cake-House]  /  nittert  obbesz  /  cornelis  albertsz  /  Claes  claesz  /. . . 

*  "Historical  Lectures  and  Addresses",  second  impression,  London, 
New  York,  and  Bombay,  1904,  p.  56. 


250  Early  English  Dissenters 

genraecht  [?]  Koefoot ",  and  in  their  presence  among  other 
matters  expressed  his  earnest  wish  that  they  might  receive  the 
English  applicants  for  membership  as  speedily  as  possible,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  he  did  not  consider  the  se-baptism  of 
Smyth  or  the  baptism  of  his  followers  all  that  was  to  be  desired. 
However,  no  union  was  accomplished  until  some  years  later, 
and  in  fact  the  English  do  not  appear  to  have  renewed  their 
application  until  Nov.  16,  1614^  Finally,  on  the  following 
Jan.  20,  1615,  after  some  further  discussion  they  were  admitted 
to  membership  and  those  who  had  not  been  baptized  or  re- 
baptized,  were  baptized  by  Hans  de  Ries.  Such  persons  as 
Swithune  Grindall,  Thomas  Odell^  Richard  Overton,  and  John 
Drew^,  were  apparently  received  as  members  on,  or  soon  after, 

Jan.  20,  1615.     In  1620  one  Thomas  (evidently  Thomas 

Pygott)  was  the  preacher  of  the  English  congregation,  and  after 
June  8  of  that  year  he  was  permitted  to  administer  baptism 
and  the  Lord's  Supper, — a  fact,  which  shows  that  a  relatively 
separate  existence  was  allowed  the  English  members.  This 
state  of  affairs  lasted  until  1640  or  1650,  when  either  so 
complete  a  union  had  been  effected,  or  perhaps  more  probably, 
so  many  of  the  English  had  returned  to  their  native  land,  that 
the  further  existence  of  any  of  them  in  Holland  is  very  difficult, 
if  not  impossible,  to  trace. 

*  For  this  and  other  following  particulars  see  Dr  B.  Evans'  "Early 
English  Baptists",  1862,  Vol.  i.,  pp.  220-24. 

2  Thomas  Odell,  or  Odal,  had  once  been  a  member  of  Francis  Johnson's 
congregation,  and  then  probably  was  first  attracted  by  Anabaptist  views. 
See  George  Johnson's  "A  discourse",  Amsterdam,  1603,  p.  194. 

3  "John  Drewe"  is  mentioned  as  a  Brownist  in  the  Records  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Court  of  York  under  the  date,  July  26, 1607  [?]  (See  Dr  John 
Waddington's  "Congregational  History,  1567-1700",  London,  1874,  p.  163). 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  CONGREGATION  OF  ENGLISH  ANABAPTISTS  UNDER 
THE  LEADERSHIP  OF  THOMAS  HELWYS  AND  JOHN 
MURTON 

So  far  as  is  known,  the  first  English  Anabaptist  congregation 
to  be  settled  in  England  was  that  led  by  Thomas  Helwys  and 
John  Murton,  the  members  of  which,  after  withdrawing  from 
Smyth  and  his  adherents  in  1609/10,  remained  about  two  years 
in  Amsterdam  and  then  removed  to  London.  It  appears  from 
the  several  writings  of  Helwys,  that  he  blamed  the  Mennonites 
for  what  he  terms  Smyth's  change  of  attitude  towards  the  ques- 
tion of  the  necessity  of  observing  a  succession  in  the  ministry. 
Evidently  most  of  the  separatists  sympathized  with  Smyth 
rather  than  with  Helwys,  who  then  seems  to  have  been  the 
leading  thinker  of  his  party.  Of  the  four  works  written  by 
Helwys  in  1611  and  1612  it  is  a  little  difficult  to  determine 
exactly  the  order  of  publication,  but  at  present  the  following 
arrangement  seems  possible  : — 

(1)  "A  DECLARATION  [OF]  \  FAITH  OF  ENGLIS[H]  | 
PEOPLE  REMAINING  AT  AM-|STERDAM  IN  HOL- 
LAND. I  Heb.  11.  6.  I  Without  Faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  | 
God.  Heb.  11.  |  Rom.  14.  23.  Whatsoever  is  not  off  Faith  is 
sin.  I  [Device]  |  Prynted.  1611."  This  little  book,  like  all  of 
Helwys'  published  writings,  is  an  octavo.  It  consists  of  24 
unnumbered  leaves  and  was  probably  printed  in  Amsterdam. 

(2)  "A  SHORT  AND  PLAINE  |  proofe  by  the  Word/ 
and  workes  |  off  God  /  that  Gods  decree  is  not  the  |  cause  off 
anye  Mans  sinne  or  |  Condemnation.  |  AND  |  That  all  Men 
are  redeamed  ]  by  Christ.  |  As  also.  \  That  no  Infants  are  | 
condemned.  |  CoUos.  2.  8.  |  Beware  lest  there  be  anie  man  that 
spoyle  I  you  through  Philosophic  /  and  vaine  j  deceipt.  |  Psal. 
119,  113.  1  I  hate  vaine  inventions:  but  thy  Law  doe  |  I  love.  | 


252  Early  English  Dissenters 

[Device.]  |  Printed  1611."  This  consists  of  only  28  unnumbered 
pages.  The  Epistle  "  To  the  ladie  Bowes  "  is  dated  "  lune  2. 
1611." 

(3)  "  AN  AD#  1  vertisement  or  admonition,  |  unto  the  Con- 
gregation, which  I  men  call  the  New  Fryelers  [Freewillers],  in 
the  lowe  |  Countries,  wrirten  in  Dutche.  |  Aud  [And]  Publiched 
in  Englis.  |  Wherein  is  handled  4.  Principall  pointes  |  of 
Religion.  |  1.  That  Christ  tooke  his  Flesh  of  Marie,  ]  haveing 
a  true  earthly,  naturall  bodie,  |  2.  That  a  Sabbath  or  day  of 
rest,  is  to  be  |  kept  holy  everie  First  day  of  the  weeke.  |  3.  That 
ther  is  no  Succession,  nor  privile-|ge  to  persons  in  the  holie 
thinges.  |  4.  That  Magistracie,  being  an  holy  ordi-|  nance  of 
God,  debarreth  not  anie  from  being  ]  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  | 
After  these  followes  certen  demandes  |  concerning  Gods  decree 
of  salva- 1  tion  and  condemnation.  |  Pro.  9.  8.  [  Rebuke  the  wyse, 
and  they  will  love  thee.  |  Pro.  29.  1.  |  They  that  harden  their 
neck,  when  they  |  are  rebuked  shall  suddenly  be  destroyed,  and 
cannot  |  be  cured  |  Printed  1611."  This  contains  96  pages,  and 
was  published  especially  for  the  instruction  of  the  Waterlanders. 

(4)  "A  SHORT  1  DECLARATION  |  of  the  mistery  of 
iniquity.  |  ler.  51.  6.  |  Flee  out  of  the  midst  of  Babell,  and 
deliver  |  every  man  his  soule,  be  not  destroyed  in  hir  |  iniquity, 
for  this  is  the  time  of  the  |  lords  vengeance,  he  will  render  | 
vnto  hir  a  recompense.  |  Hosea  10.  12.  |  Sow  to  your  selves  in 
right  eousnes,  reape  |  after  the  measure  of  mercie,  breake  vp 
your  I  fallow  ground,  for  it  is  time  to  seeke  j  the  lord,  till  he 
come  &  raine  j  righteousnes  vpon  you.  |  [Device]  j  Anno  1612." 
This  consists  of  viii  +  212  pages.  An  autograph  note  by  Helwys 
to  the  king,  on  the  recto  of  the  leaf  preceding  the  title-page  of 
the  Bodleian  copy,  shows  that  when  this  last  work  was  pub- 
lished in  1612,  he  was  living  in  England  at  "  Spittlefeild  neare 
London  ".  Spitalfields  may,  therefore,  have  been  the  first  loca- 
tion in  London  of  Helwys'  church.-  The  general  tone  of  the 
note  indicates  that  the  author  and  his  congregation  were  already 
having  trouble  with  the  authorities.  When  the  first  three  of 
these  books  were  written  Helwys  appears  to  have  been  in  Holland. 

From  the  four  works  we  find  that  the  following  opinions 
were  prevalent  in  Helwys'  congregation: — 


The  Congregation  of  Helwys  and  Murton    253 

(1)  Baptism,  not  a  church  covenant,  is  the  true  "  form  "  of 
a  church. 

(2)  Every  separate  congregation  of  people,  whether  it  has 
officers  or  not,  may  "  come  together  to  Pray,  Prophecie,  breake 
bread,  and  administer  in  all  the  holy  ordinances  ". 

(3)  "  a  Church  ought  not  to  consist  off  such  a  multitude  as 
cannot  have  perticuler  knowledg  oue  [one]  off  another." 

(4)  "  the  Officers  off  everie  Church  or  congregacion  are 
either  Elders,  who  by  their  office  do  especially  feed  the  flock 
concerning  their  soules,...or  Deacons  Men,  and  Wemen  who  by 
their  office  releave  the  necessities  off  the  poore  and  impotent 
brethren  concerning  their  bodies  ". 

(5)  These  officers  "  are  to  be  chosen  when  there  are  persons 
qualified  according  to  the  rules  in  Christ  Testament,... By 
Election  and  approbacion  off  that  Church  or  congregacion 
whereoff  they  are  members,... with  Fasting,  Prayer,  and  Laying 
on  off  hands,... And  there  being  but  one  rule  for  Elders,  there- 
fore but  one  sort  off  Elders."  This  congregation  also  main- 
tained that  church  officers  may  hold  office  only  in  the  church  in 
which  they  have  been  ordained  to  their  respective  offices.  John 
Smyth  held  that  "  an  Elder  off  one  [true]  Church  is  an  Elder 
off  all  [true]  Churches  in  the  World  ". 

(6)  Magistrates  are  to  be  highly  honored  as  a  means  of 
taking  vengeance  "  on  them  that  do  evill ",  and  may  even  be 
members  "  off  CHRISTS  church ",  and  retain  their  office. 
Smyth  opposed  this  view. 

(7)  An  Anabaptist  (of  the  Helwys  type)  may  take  an  oath 
"  for  the  deciding  off  strife  ". 

Helwys  would  also  make  believers'  baptism  [by  sprinkling 
or  pouring]  an  absolute  necessity  for  salvation,  teaching  that 
the  contrary  doctrine  of  infant  baptism  is  sufficient  reason  for 
eternal  punishment,  so  "  that  iff  you  had  no  other  sin  amongst 
you  al,  but  this,  you  perish  everie  man  off  you  from  the  highest 
to  the  lowest,  iff  you  repent  not ", — which  is  probably  as  strong 
a  statement  of  this  doctrine  as  has  ever  been  made. 

Helwys,  like  Smyth,  was  an  Arminian,  or  General,  Ana- 
baptist, who  believed  in  universal  redemption,  i.e.,  that  Christ 
died  to  save  all  men  and  not  only  certain  elect  persons,  but  in 


254  Early  English  Dissenters 

his  third  publication  he  seeks  to  show  that  though  he  holds 
this  doctrine,  he  does  not  uphold  "that  most  damnable  heresie" 
of  Free-will,  which  was  usually  supposed  to  be  the  natural 
concomitant  of  the  former  doctrine. 

In  his  fourth  work,  Helwys  appeals  to  King  James  I  against 
the  Hierarchy  of  the  Reformation,  which  he  interprets  to  be  the 
second  Beast  in  the  Book  of  Revelation,  and  asks  that  his  con- 
gregation may  have  freedom  to  worship  by  themselves  without 
disturbance  from  Archbishops,  Bishops,  and  other  high  officials  in 
the  Established  Church.  He  certainly  exaggerates  the  number 
of  separatists  (he  cannot  mean  Anabaptists)  when  he  speaks  of 
"  vs  (that  are  thousands  of  the  K.  of  great  Brittans  subiects)  ". 
In  this  long,  rambling  work,  Helwys  attacks  his  opponents  in 
scathing  terms.  He  speaks  "  of  the  Lord  Bs.  [Bishops]  that  are 
not  able  to  direct  themselves  from  the  waies  of  death,  but  are 
perished  every  man,  that  ever  bare  that  Office  with  those  names 
and  power,  if  they  repented  not  thereof,  although  they  had  no 
other  sinne :  and  they  also  that  do  now  beare  that  Office  with 
those  titles  &  power  shall  likewise  all  perish  to  everlasting 
destruction,  if  they  do  not  repent  thereof,  and  cast  it  away:..."^ 
He  also  manifests  considerable  hostility  toward  that  "  much 
applauded  profession  of  Puritanisme.  The  which  profession  to 
prove  it  is  a  false  profession,  yea  and  such  a  false  profession,  as 
wee  know  not  the  like  vpon  the  earth,  wee  shall  not  need  to 
produce  anie  testimony  but  your  owne:..."^ 

Wee  wil  not  follow  you  [Puritan  preachers]  in  these  perticulers, 
except  further  occation  be  offered.  But  remember  how  you  compare 
your  fellow  Preists  to  Circumcellions  or  Fryers,  goeing  vp  and  downe 
with  the  bishops  bulls  like  beggars,  to  see  where  they  can  get  enter- 
tainment and  see  not  al  this  while  your  selves,  yea  soiue  of  your 
cheife  spirits  for  working  lying  wonders,  stand  in  the  market  place 
to  be  hired  from  the  East  to  the  west,  and  to  be  transported  from 
North  to  South,  wheresoever  [wheresoever]  you  can  get  a  good 
Towne  pulpit,  or  a  privileged  Chappel  a  great  Chamber  or  dyning 
parlor  to  administer  in,  how  prophane  soever  the  Towne  or  hous- 
hold  be,  you  wil  not  let  to  make  them  all  partakers  of  the  holy 
thinges  at  first,  before  you  knowe  your  shepe,  or  your  shepe  knowe 
you,  contrary  to  Christs  owne  words.     loh,  10.  14...^ 

1  "A  Short  Declaration  of  the  mistery  of  iniquity",  1612,  p.  73. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  86.  3  iiid,^  p.  98. 


The  Congregation  of  Helwys  and  Murton    255 

The  Brownists  or  Barrowists  receive  little  praise : — 

You  [Brownists]  confessing  your  selves  to  be  of  the  world  before 
you  ioined  your  selves  together  in  your  voluntarie  profession,  by 
a  Covenant  of  your  owne  devisings  (you  being  of  the  world)  your 
Condition  was  the  same  :..} 

they  [the  Brownists'  prophets]  are  false  Prophets  because  they  are 
Elected  and  ordeined  to  their  Office,  by  a  congregation  of  intidels  or 
vnbelevers  that  are  not  ioyned  to  Christ,  and  have  not  put  on 
Christ  by  baptisme, ...^ 

In  closing  Helwys  states  his  belief  that  Christians  should 
not  flee  into  foreign  lands  to  avoid  persecution.  As  he  seems 
already  to  have  returned  to  England  when  this  work  was  pub- 
lished, he  must  have  been  aware  of  the  risk  he  ran  in  so  openly 
making  his  views  known  to  the  world.  Indeed,  he  thereby 
exhibited  bravery  as  well  as  rashness,  and  as  might  have  been 
expected  he  became  a  martyr  for  his  opinions. 

In  the  Library  of  the  House  of  Lords  is  a  small  piece  of 
paper,  on  one  side  of  which  is  preserved  "  A  most  humble  sup- 
plication of  divers  poore  prisoners  and  many  others  the  kinges 
maiesties  loyall  subiectes  ready  to  testifie  it  by  the  oath  of 
allegeance  in  all  sinceritie,  whose  Greviances  are  lamentable, 
onely  for  cause  of  conscience."*  The  supplication  is  neatly 
written  and  addressed  "  To  the  right  Honorable  assemblie  of 
the  Commons-house  of  Parliament ",  and  is  signed,  "  By  his 
maiesties  faithful  subiectes  most  falsly  called  Anabaptistes." 
The  handwriting  may  be  that  of  Thomas  Helwys.  The  peti- 
tion states  that  the  suppliants  are  willing  to  take  the  Oath 
of  Allegiance,  but  the  Bishops  will  not  let  them.  Bitterly 
they  complain :  "  kept  have  wee  bene  by  them  many  yeres 
in  lingering  imprisonements,  devided  from  wives,  children, 
servantes  &  callinges,  not  for  any  other  cause  but  onely  for 
conscience  towardes  God,  to  the  vtter  vndoeing  of  vs,  our 
wives  &  children."  Then  they  supplicate  that  they  may  be 
freed  upon  taking  the  Oath  of  Allegiance.    The  words  "  reiected 

^  "  A  Short  Declaration  of  the  misery  of  iniquity",  p.  125. 

2  Ihid.,  p.  126. 

'  See  the  Third  Report  of  the  Historical  Manuscripts  Commission, 
p.  14.  The  paper  is  there  dated  "  [1613] ",  but  as  Parliament  only  met  on 
April  5,  1614,  its  real  date  is  clearly  1614. 


256  Eai'ly  English  Dissenters 

by  the  comitee  "  are  written  in  a  scrawly  hand  at  the  close  of 
the  petition. 

Now  it  is  well  known  that  Helwys'  congregation  returned 
to  England  some  time  in  1611  or  1612,  so  that  when  the 
supplication  was  written,  the  suppliants  could  not  have  been 
imprisoned  much  more  than  two  or  three  years.  No  doubt 
even  this  period  seemed  to  them  like  "  many  yeres ".  The 
date  1614  agrees  well  with  the  fact  that  John  Murton,  or 
Morton  \  was  in  prison  in  London  in  1613^  and  we  may 
reasonably  surmise  that  if  Helwys  was  not  already  dead,  he 
also  was  a  prisoner  at  the  same  time.  However  this  may  be, 
Helwys  was  certainly  not  living  in  1616,  for  in  that  year 
Geofifrey  Helwys,  who  was  probably  Thomas  Helwys'  brother, 
speaks  in  his  will  of  Thomas  Helwys  as  no  longer  being  alive 
("  Dictionary  of  National  Biography  "). 

This  early  dating  of  Helwys'  death  is,  of  course,  quite  con- 
trary to  the  account  given  by  Thomas  Crosby,  who  thought 
that  he  was  living  "in  all  probability"  on  May  10,  1622,  and 
wrote  on  that  date  a  letter  signed  "  H.  H."^  To  be  sure,  it 
might  strike  the  reader  as  strange  that  one  whose  initials  were 
"  T.  H."  should  sign  them  as  "  H.  H.",  but  the  case  appears  still 
more  interesting  when  all  the  facts  concerning  this  letter  are 
known.  In  the  first  place,  a  copy  of  it  is  given  in  Benjamin 
Stinton's  "A  Repository  of  Divers  Historical  Matters  relating 
to  the  English  Antipedobaptists...l712  ",  a  transcript  of  which 
is  now  incorporated  ("Numb:  7:")  in  the  Gould  Manuscript  at 
Regent's  Park  College,  London,  and  the  letter  is  referred  to  in 
another  of  Stinton's  anonymous  manuscripts  in  the  Gould  Collec- 
tion entitled,  "  An  Account  of  Some  |  of  the  |  Most  Eminent  & 
Leading  Men  |  among  the  |  English  Antipgedobaptists.  |  ...", 
which  was  first  identified  as  Stinton's  by  the  author  about 
eight  years  ago.  In  this  latter  MS.  on  fol.  11.  Stinton  gives 
part  of  the  account  of  Helwys  which  Crosby  later  published, 

1  Murton  =  Morton  just  as  Crumwell  =  Cromwell. 

2  See  the  title-page  and  page  1  of  John  Wilkinson's  "The  Sealed 
Fovntaine"  [1646]. 

3  See  "  The  History  of  the  English  Baptists  ",  Vol.  i.,  pp.  275-76  and 
133-39. 


The  Congregation  of  Helwys  and  Murton    257 

but  some  one,  possibly  Crosby,  has  questioned  Stinton's  re- 
ferring the  letter  of  May  10,  1622,  to  Thomas  Helwys,  and  has 
made  a  note  on  the  verso  of  fol.  10  to  the  following  effect : — 

fNo  [Number] — for  your  No  7  has  the  Signature  of  H.  H. 
whereas  you  call  this  person  Thd'  then  it  should  haue  been  T.  H. 
Q.  was  not  H.  H.  Henry  Haggar? 

It  is,  of  course,  perfectly  manifest  that  "  H.  H."  cannot  have 
been  intended  for  "  T.  H."  except  through  a  very  unlikely  error, 
and  at  that  early  date  it  is  equally  improbable,  if  not  impossible, 
that  Henry  Haggar  could  have  been  the  person  to  whom  allu- 
sion is  made.  Who  then  is  this  "  H.  H."  ?  On  turning  to 
"I.P."'si  '' Anahaptismes  \  MYSTERIE  |  OF  INIQUITY  | 
VNMASKED.  |  ...",  1623,  in  which  the  letter  in  question  was 
originally  published-,  the  whole  difficulty  was  quickly  solved,  for 
the  initials  there  signed,  though  not  so  clear-cut  as  usual,  were 
certainly  not  "  H.  H."  but  "  H.  N."  In  order  to  be  perfectly 
sure  that  this  was  the  correct  reading,  the  writer  consulted 
Mr  Robert  Procter,  then  one  of  the  most  expert  critics  on  the 
staff  of  the  British  Museum.  He  at  once  agreed  that  this  new 
reading  was  the  right  one.  Thus  was  the  main  difficulty  quickly 
removed.  But  who  then  was  "  H.  N."  ?  None  other,  without 
doubt,  than  Henry  Niclaes,  father  of  the  Family  of  Love  or 
Familists,  of  whom  some  account  has  already  been  given,  and 
who  in  those  days  were  popularly,  but  incorrectly,  thought  to 
be  a  branch  of  the  Anabaptists.  Thus  the  only  argument  that 
has  ever  been  advanced  to  prove  that  Helwys  lived  after  1616 
may  be  readily  dismissed. 

By  1615,  and  possibly  even  as  early  as  161.3,  John  Murton 
had  become  the  leader  of  the  Anabaptists  in  England.  He  is 
accredited  about  that  time  with  being  "  a  Teacher  of  a  Church 
of  the  Anabaptists  in  Newgate"'.  Of  Murton's  early  life  at 
present  almost  nothing  is  known.     John  Fenwicke,  "  Lievtenant 

1  I  would  suggest  that  the  initials  "LP."  may  more  probably  be 
those  of  lohn  Paget,  than  those  of  lohn  Preston,  as  suggested  by 
Dr  Dexter. 

2  Pp.  1-11. 

3  I.[ohn]  G.[raunt]'s  "Truths  Victory  against  Heresie",  London,  1645, 
p.  19. 

B.  17 


258  Early  English  Dissenters 

Collonel "  in  the  "  Epistle  Dedicatory "  of  his  work  entitled, 
"CHRIST  I  Ruling  in  midst  of  his  |  ENEMIES;  |  ...",  London, 
1643,  speaks  of  one  Murton,  who  was  among  the  "godly 
[Puritan]  ministers",  who  had  been  "expulsed"  from  "Newcastle 
upon  Tyne".  This,  however,  cannot  have  been  our  John 
Murton,  who  is  known  to  have  been  a  furrier  of  Gainsborough, 
and  who  was  twenty-five  years  old  on  August  23,  1608,  when 
at  Amsterdam  he  married  Jane  Hodgkin  of  Worksop,  then 
twenty- three  years  old^ 

In  1615  Murton  and  his  followers  published  a  book  entitled 
"OBIECTIONS:  I  Answered  by  way  of  Dialo-|gue,  wherein 
is  proved  |  By  the  Law  of  God :  |  By  the  law  of  our  Land :  | 
And  by  his  Ma"®^  many  testimonies  |  That  no  man  ought  to  be 
persecuted  |  for  his  religion,  so  he  testifie  his  alle-|geance  by 
the  Oath,  appointed  by  Law.  |  ..."  Of  this  original  edition 
only  two  copies,  both  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  appear  to  have 
been  preserved  in  England^but  the  work  was  reprinted  in  1662 
under  the  considerably  altered  title,  "  Persecution  for  Religion  | 
JUDG'D  and  CONDEMN'D  :  |  ..."»  It  seems  probable  that 
when  the  work  was  written  Murton  was  still  in  prison.  In  this 
dialogue  the  author  treats  of  some  other  matters  besides  persecu- 
tion. For  instance,  the  question  is  brought  up  as  to  who  may 
be  considered  a  true  administrator  of  baptism  at  a  time  when 
the  rule  of  Antichrist  had  so  long  prevailed  in  the  Church^: — 

C.[hristian]  For  answers  to  this  :  there  are  three  waies  professed 
in  the  world,  one  by  the  Papists,  and  their  several  successors,  pro- 
fessing succession  fi^om  the  Pope  and  his  ministers  :  another  by  the 
Famihsts  and  scattered  flock,  that  none  may  intermeddle  therewith 
lawfully,  til  their  extraordinary  men  come :  another,  wee  and  others 
afiirme  that  any  disciple  of  Christ  in  what  part  oif  the  world  soever 
commeing  to  the  Lords  way,  he  by  the  Word  and  Spirit  of  GOD 
preaching  that  way  vnto  others,  and  converting  /  he  may  and  ought 
also  to  baptize  them : . . . 

1  See  the  "Transactions"  of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society, 
Vol.  II.,  No.  3,  for  September,  1905,  p.  164. 

2  Another  copy  of  this  first  edition  is  said  to  be  in  the  Library  of 
Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

•''  A  modernized  text  of  this  pamphlet  was  published  in  the  Hanserd 
Knollys  Society's  edition  of  "  Tracts  on  Liberty  of  Conscience ",  London, 
1846,  pp.  83-180.  *  Pp.  64-5. 


The  Congregation  of  Helwys  mid  Murton    259 

The  matter  of  fleeing  from  one's  native  country  on  account 
of  persecution  is  handled  in  the  following  manner^: — 

I.[ndifferent]  I  hope  I  shall  testify  to  all  /  my  spedie  walking  in  the 
steps  of  these  holie  men  /  but  one  thing  /  there  is  yet  which  hath 
much  hindred  the  growth  of  godlines  in  this  kingdom  /  and  that  is 
that  many  so  sooiie  as  they  see  or  feare  trouble  will  ensue  /  they 
flie  into  another  Nation  who  cannot  see  their  conversation  /  and 
thereby  deprive  many  poore  ignorant  soules  in  their  own  Nation  / 
of  their  information  /  and  of  their  conversation  amongst  them. 
C.[hristian]  Oh  /  that  hath  bene  the  overthrowe  of  Religion  in  this 
land  /  the  best  able  and  greater  part  being  gone  /  and  leaving 
behind  them  some  fewe  /  who  by  the  others  departure  have  had 
their  afflictions  and  contempt  increased  which  hath  bene  the 
cause  of  many  falling  back  /  aud  of  the  adversaries  exalting  /  but 
they  wil  tell  vs  /  we  are  not  to  judge  things  /  by  the  effects  / 
therefore  we  must  prove  that  their  flight  [is]  unlawfull  /  or  we 
say  nothing. 

So  far  as  can  now  be  learned  the  original  publication  of  this 
work  made  little  impression  on  the  English  people.  In  fact, 
at  that  time  the  English  Anabaptists  were  probably  looked 
upon  as  of  no  importance,  but  when  John  Terry  published  at 
Oxford  in  1617,  ^' THE  |  REASO[NA-?]!BLENESSE  OF 
WISE  [AND?]  I  holy  truth:  and  the  absurditie  |  of  foolish 
and  wicked  \  Errour.  \  ...",  he  devoted  considerable  space  to 
the  general  subject  of  the  Anabaptists. 

Another  work  entitled  "  Truth's  Champion  "  is  said  to  have 
been  published  by  John  Murton  in  1617  ^  and  to  have  been 
twice  republished  by  the  General  Anabaptists  after  the  Civil 
Wars.  It  seems,  however,  that  very  little  is  now  known  about 
this  book,  and  that  no  copy  of  the  second  or  third  editions  is  at 
present  accessible.  It  has  even  proved  impossible  to  ascertain 
the  years  in  which  these  two  later  editions  were  published,  but 
happily  there  are  a  few  references  to  the  third  edition  in  the 
publisher's  lists.  From  one  of  these  we  learn  that  this  last 
edition  was  brought  out  by  Francis  Smith  "  at  the  Sign  of  the 
Elephant  and  Castle  in  Cornhill,  near  the  Royal- Exchange ", 
London,  in  or  before  1678.     The  title  and  description  of  the 

1  P.  76. 

2  See  Robert  Barclay's  "The  Inner  Life  of  the  Religious  Societies  of 
the  Commonwealth",  Third  Edition,  London,  1879,  p.  412  and  note. 

17—2 


260  Early  English  Dissenters 

book  as  given  in  his  list  at  the  back  of  Thomas  Grantham's 
"  Christianismus  Primitivus",  1678,  is  as  follows: — 

"  Truth's  Champion^ :  Wherein  are  made  plain  these  Par- 
ticulars, That  Christ  died  for  all  Men.  Of  Predestination,  of 
Election,  Free-will,  Falling-away.  Of  Baptism,  of  Original-Sin. 
The  Copy  of  this  Book  was  found  hid  in  an  Old  Wall  near 
Colchester  in  Essex.     The  third  Edition." 

In  1620  the  English  Anabaptists  published  a  small  octavo 
entitled,  "A  \  DISCRIPTION  |  OF  WHAT  GOD  \  hath  Pre- 
destinated I  Concerning  |  Man."  Of  this  book  at  least  several 
copies  are  to  be  found.  It  was  apparently  written  by  one 
person  and  is  therefore  with  good  reason  ascribed  to  John 
Murton.  This  was,  I  think,  the  first  edition  of  "Truth's 
Champion  ",  and  I  do  not  now  believe  that  Murton  published 
any  work  in  1617.  At  a  later  period,  the  name  "  Truth's 
Champion"  might  very  well  have  been  given  to  "A  Discription" 
as  a  suitable  title.  It  will  be  noticed  that  "  The  Contents  of 
the  Booke  "  on  the  verso  of  the  title-page  of  "  A  Discription  " 
singularly  resemble  the  above  account  of  the  contents  of 
"Truth's  Champion",  being  "1.  Of  Predestination.  2.  Of 
Election,  and  Reprobation.  3.  Of  Falling  away.  4,  Of  Free- 
will. 5.  Of  the  Originall  estate  of  Man.  6.  Of  The  beginnings 
of  Christ,  or  Foundation.  7.  And  lastly,  An  answ.  to  a  little 
Printed  writing  of  lohn  Robinsons,  touching  Baptisine."  Still 
more  like  the  contents  of  "  Truth's  Champion "  is  the  account 
of  the  contents  of  "A  Discription"  given  on  Sig.  Aj  verso  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Reader,  where  it  will  be  observed  that  the 
contents  of  the  two  books  are  identical,  with  the  exception  of  two 
inversions  in  the  order,  being  "  1.  Touching  Predestination,  2.  Of 
Election,  3.  Of  Falling  away,  4.  Of  Free-will,  5.  Of  Originall 
sinne,  and  lastly.  Of  the  entrance  into  Christ  [i.e.,  Baptism]  ". 

There  is,  I  think,  only  one  strong  objection  against  Murton's 
"A  Discription",  1620,  being  the  first  edition  of  "Truth's 
Champion",  and  even  that  is  not  quite  insurmountable.    Robert 

*  John  Murton's  work,  which  was  twice  republished  under  the  title 
"  Truth's  Champion  ",  may  be  in  some  way  related  to  Richard  Stookes'  at 
present  equally  unknown  book  entitled,  "Truths  Champion,  or  Truths 
Companion",  published  in  1650  or  earlier. 


The  Congregation  of  Helivys  and  Marton     261 

Barclay  tells  us  that  he  saw  a  copy  of  the  third  edition  of 
"  Truth's  Champion  "  about  forty  years  ago,  and  on  page  412  of 
"  The  Inner  Life",  Third  Edition,  London,  1879,  he  gives  from  it 
a  citation  concerning  the  Seekers  which  does  not  occur  in  "  A 
Discription ".  This  fact  would  make  the  view  here  advanced 
utterly  impossible,  were  it  not  for  the  probability  that  the  word 
Seekers  was  not  used  as  early  as  1620.  My  theory,  therefore, 
is  that  this  paragraph  quoted  by  Barclay  was  added  by  the 
later  editor  of  Murton's  work  to  counteract  the  influence  of 
a  party  that  since  1640  had  come  to  be  known  by  that  name 
and  to  have  much  more  influence  than  it  had  before  1620. 
Barclay  also  says'  that  the  initials  J.  M.  appear  on  the  title- 
page  of  "  Truth's  Champion  ",  These,  of  course,  are  not  found 
in  "  A  Discription  ",  but  they  may  originally  have  been  only 
written  in  ink  on  the  title-page  of  the  copy  of  the  first  edition 
"  found  hid  in  an  Old  Wall  near  Colchester  near  Essex  ",  where 
John  Wilkinson,  one  of  Murton's  strongest  opponents,  lived. 

The  truth  or  falsity  of  this  theory  will  be  quickly  mani- 
fested when  a  copy  of  the  third  edition  of  Murton's  "  Truth's 
Champion"  is  discovered ^  but  it  should  be  said  in  defence  of 
the  theory,  that  if  Murton's  "  A  Discription  "  does  not  prove  to 
be  the  first  edition  of  his  "  Truth's  Champion  ",  the  two  works 
must  be  remarkably  similar.  In  fact,  it  is  almost  impossible  to 
conceive  how  one  man  could  write  two  distinct  works  within 
three  years  of  each  other  on  exactly  the  same  subjects. 

In  "  A  Discription  "  Murton  gives  the  following  opinion  of 
the  way  in  which  a  church  should  be  organized  ^  In  this  it  will 
be  noticed  he  does  not  even  mention  a  covenant,  a  fact  which 
probably  indicates  that,  if  the  earliest  Anabaptist  congregations 
in  England  employed  some  simple  covenant  formula,  they  must 
have  laid  very  little  emphasis  upon  it.  With  them  baptism 
had  evidently  taken  the  place  of  the  church  covenant : — 

1  "  The  Inner  Life  of  the  Religious  Societies  of  the  Commonwealth  ", 
Third  Edition,  London,  1879,  p.  411. 

2  As  this  sheet  goes  to  press,  it  looks  as  though  the  author  may  yet 
see  a  copy  of  "  Truth's  Champion  ",  in  which  case  the  reader  shall  know 
of  any  further  results  in  a  brief  Appendix  at  the  end  of  the  volume. 

3  Pp.  154-56. 


262  Early  English  Dissenters 

But  first  T  will  lay  down  a  maine  foundation,  which  being  suf- 
ficiently proued,  the  euident  truth  shall  plainly  appear  :  and  this  it 
is ;  That  the  members  and  Churches  of  Christ,  are  so  made  :  both 
by  Faith  and  Baptisme,  and  not  by  the  one  only,  which  being  true ; 
it  will  follow,  that  neither  the  Church  &  members  of  Home,  are 
members  and  Church  of  Christ,  because  Faith  is  neither  required  nor 
performed  thereto  ;  nor  yet  any  profession  of  people,  that  seperate 
from  Rome  as  from  no  Church  of  Chi'ist,  retayning  Homes  Baptisme, 
and  building  new  Churches  without  Baptisme. 

That  the  members  and  Churches  of  Christ,  are  so  made  by  Faith 

and  Baptisme,  euen  by  both,  it  is  proued  in  Rom.  11.  20.  &c so 

that  to  be  gathered  into  the  name  of  Christ,  by  being  made 
Disciples  and  baptised,  is,  to  be  made  members  of  his  body  (which 
is  his  Church)  of  his  Flesh,  and  of  his  bone : . . .  Thus  Christ  made 
Disciples,  wee  must  be  the  sonnes  of  God  by  Faith,  and  put  on  Christ 
by  Baptisme... and  wee  are  made  partakers  of  Christ,  by  hauing  the 
beginnings,  which  beginnings  are  Repentayice,  Faith,  and  Baptisme, 
other  beginnings,  or  foundation  can  no  man  lay. 

This  work  also  makes  it  clear  that  these  early  General 
Baptists  maintained  that  any  private  church-member  might 
preach,  make  converts,  and  administer  baptism^ : — 

I  say  it  is  a  meere  fixion,  there  is  not  the  least  shew  in  all  the 
Testament  of  I^sus  Christ,  that  Baptising  is  peculiar  onely  to 
Pastors,  which  might  satisfie  any  man  of  reason ;  neither  can  it  bee 
proued  that  euer  ordinary  Pastor  did  Baptise.  And  it  is  most 
plaine,  conuerting  and  Baptising  is  no  part  of  the  Pastors  office  : 
his  office  is,  to  feed,  to  watch,  to  ouersee,  the  flocke  of  Christ 
already  the  Church  :  his  charge  is  to  take  heede  to  the  flocke,  and 
to  feed  the  Church,  and  to  defend  them  in  the  truth  against  all 
gainsayers :  furthes  [further]  then  which,  no  charge  is  laid  vpon 
him  by  vertue  of  his  office  :  That  bee  may  Preach,  conuert  and 
Baptise,  I  deny :  not,  as  another  disciple  may ;  but  not  that  either 
it  is  required,  or  he  doth  performe  it  by  vertue  of  his  office  ;  no 
proofe  for  that  imagination  can  be  shewed  :  and  therfore  it  re- 
maineth  firme  &  stable ;  euery  Disciple  that  hath  abilitie  is 
authorized,  yea  commanded  to  Preach,  conuert  &  Baptise,  aswell 
and  asmuch  (if  not  more)  then  a  Pastor. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Anabaptists  themselves 
printed  and  bound  "A  Discription " I  They  must,  therefore, 
have  had  a  press  of  their  own  which  they  probably  brought 
with  them  from  Holland. 

1  P.  163. 

2  P.  176.  "if  any  defects  bee  either  in  Printing  or  binding,  (both  which 
vnto  vs  are  difficult)  wee  pray  the  one  may  bee  passed  ouer;  and  th' other 
may  be  amended..." 


The  Congregation  of  Helioys  and  Murton    263 

From  the  time  of  Thomas  Crosby,  and  still  earlier,  it  has 
been  repeatedly  asserted  that  another  book  defending  Baptist 
views  was  published  in  1618.  Even  Dr  Dexter  accepted  this 
statement  as  a  fact,  but  unfortunately  like  most  traditions  it 
needs  some  correction.     Here  is  what  Crosby  says : — 

In  the  year  1618.  there  came  forth  a  book,  vindicating  the 
principles  of  the  Baptists  [Note  :  "/I  plain  and  well-grounded  treatise 
concerniny  baptism."^.  This  was  translated  from  the  Dutch,  and  is 
thought  to  be  the  first  that  was  published  in  English  against  the 
baptizing  of  infants  ^ 

Of  course  we  are  all  well  aware  to-day  that  other  earlier 
works  in  English  had  been  published  on  this  subject,  but 
Crosby  is  also  apparently  mistaken  in  the  date  of  the  pamphlet, 
and  has  not  given  the  title  quite  correctly.  Indeed,  it  is  now 
evident  that  he  never  saw  this  work,  but  for  his  information 
concerning  it  relied  entirely  on  the  statements  of  William  WalP, 
and  Thomas  Cobbet*.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  except  for  the 
words,  "  Printed  in  the  yeare  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  JESUS 
CHRIST",  the  pamphlet  is  undated,  and  though  Crosby 
expresses  surprise  that  it  was  not  answered  until  1648,  we  on 
the  contrary  find  that  circumstance  most  natural,  for  it  was 
evidently  printed  in  that  year  (Old  Style),  when  with  the  trial, 

1  "The  History  of  the  English  Baptists ",  Vol.  I.,  London,  1738,  p.  128, 

2  "The  History  of  Infimt  Baptism",  Second  Edition,  London,  1707, 
p.  426.  Crosby  evidently  took  the  date  and  title  of  this  pamphlet  from 
Wall's  account.     Wall  says  : — 

"the  first  [book]  that  ever  I  heard  of,  that  was  set  forth  in  English, 
upholding  this  Tenet  [of  Antipaedobaptism],  was  a  Dutch  Book,  called, 
A  plain  and  well  grounded  Treatise  concerning  Baptism.  This  was  trans- 
lated and  printed  in  English  Anno  1618.  the  16th  Year  of  King  James 
the  First ".     Evidently,  therefore,  Wall  himself  had  not  seen  this  work. 

3  Thomas  Gobbet  of  "  Lyn  in  New-England  "  answered  this  pamphlet 
in  1648  in  his  work  entitled,  "A  just  Vindication  of  the  Covenant  and 
Church-Estate  of  Children  of  Church-Members :... Hereunto  is  annexed  a 
Refutation  of  a  certain  Pamphlet,  styled,  The  plain  and  ivel-grounded 
Treatise  touchiyig  Baptism",  London,  4°.  The  fact  that  this  " Refutation"  is 
annexed  indicates  that  "A  just  Vindication"  had  probably  been  completed 
when  Cobbet  first  saw  "The  plain  and  wel-grounded  Treatise",  a  fact  which 
favours  our  belief  that  "  A  very  plain  and  well  grounded  Treatise  "  itself 
was  published  in  1648,  just  before  the  publication  of  Cobbet's  work.  Crosby 
was  indebted  to  Cobbet  for  whatever  else  he  says  about  this  pamphlet. 


264  Early  English  Dissenters 

condemnation  and  death  of  Charles  I  the  reign  of  Christ  on 
earth  was  fondly  believed  by  some  of  the  pious  to  be  beginning. 

In  fact,  the  general  appearance  of  this  work  is  not  such 
as  to  warrant  us  in  believing  that  it  was  printed  before  1640. 
It  was  evidently  published  after  the  licensing  of  the  press 
became  less  rigorous,  when  pamphlets  began  to  be  printed  in 
a  somewhat  different  style  from  that  which  was  customary  in 
1618.  Of  course,  so  far  as  appearance  is  concerned  this  work 
might  have  been  printed  in  1645  as  well  as  in  1648.  Indeed, 
the  former  date  is  suggested  as  a  possible  time  of  publication 
on  one  of  the  copies  which  the  author  has  seen,  but  1648  (Old 
Style)  appears  to  be  an  even  more  probable  date. 

Though  this  pamphlet,  therefore,  does  not  properly  belong 
within  our  period,  yet  because  copies  of  it  are  so  scarce,  and 
because  these  mistakes  concerning  it  have  been  made,  its 
correct  title  may  be  given  here.     This  reads  as  follows : — 

"  A  very  plain  and  well  |  grounded  |  TREATISE  |  CON- 
CERNING I  BAPTISME.  I  Wherein  it  is  very  cleerly  shown, 
and  out  of  \  good  grounds  demonstrated  that  Baptisme  was 
instituted  and  \  ordained  by  the  Lord  Christ,  for  those  that 
believe  and  repent,  \  and  was  so  taught  and  used  by  his  Apostles, 
and  observed  and  \  followed  by  the  Primitive  Church.  \  As  also 
how  that  in  processe  of  time  the  Baptisme  |  of  Children  in 
stead  of  true  Baptisme  was  brought  in  |  and  received,  and  by 
divers  Councels,  Popes,  and  |  Emperours  commanded  to  be 
observed.  |  Marke  16.  26.  |  He  that  shall  believe  and  be  Baptised 
shall  be  saved,  \  But  he  that  will  not  believe  shall  be  damned.  \ 
Printed  in  the  yeare  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  |  JESUS 
CHRIST."  [i.e.,  ?  1648  (Old  Style)],  4°,  pp.  39. 

In  1620,  it  is  also  said,  that  the  English  Anabaptists  pub- 
lished "An  Humble  Supplication"  to  King  James  I^  This 
may  be  true,  but  in  modern  times  no  copy  of  a  printed  edition 
of  that  year  has  been  seen,  and  the  edition  published  in 
1662  does  not  give  us  any  solid  ground  for  believing  that  the 
Supplication  was  ever  printed  before  that  date.     The  edition  of 

*  See  "  Tracts  on  Liberty  of  Conscience  and  Persecution.  1614-1661 ", 
Hanserd  KnoUys  Society,  London,  1846,  pp.  181-231,  where  the  edition  of 
1062  is  reprinted  in  modernized  text. 


The  Congregation  of  Helioys  and  Murton     265 

1662  merely  says  that  it  had  been  "presented,  1620",  probably 
meaning  in  manuscript.  Of  course,  this  theory  may  not  prove 
to  be  correct,  but  it  is  suggested  because  we  now  know  that 
Crosby  was  not  well  acquainted  with  the  source  literature  of 
his  subject,  and  in  fact  probably  never  saw  many  of  the  works 
mentioned  in  his  "History".  The  following  statement  in  this 
Supplication  seems  to  indicate  that  other  Anabaptist  congrega- 
tions than  that  at  London  may  have  existed  before  1620,  but 
possibly  the  reference  is  to  separatists  in  general : — 

Our  miseries  are  long  and  lingering  Imprisonments  for  many  years 
in  divers  Counties  of  England,  in  which  many  have  dyed  and  left 
behind  them  Widows  and  many  snudl  Children^. 

On  May  10,  1622,  a  letter,  to  which  reference  has  previously 
been  made,  was  written  by  an  Anabaptist  in  London  to  some 
friends  of  his  in  the  Church  of  England  seeking  to  persuade 
them  to  become  Anabaptists.  The  letter  was  intercepted  and 
came  into  the  hands  of  one  "  I.  P."  [lohn  Paget  ?],  who  had  it 
published  in  1623  in  a  volume  already  mentioned  entitled, 
"A71abaptism.es  Mysterie  of  Iniquity  Vnmasked  ".  This  letter,  it 
will  be  noticed,  is  signed  with  the  mystic  initials  "H.  N.",  that  is, 
of  Henry  Niclaes,  father  of  the  Family  of  Love,  and  "LP."  pre- 
faces the  letter  by  stating  that  it  was  "indited"  for  an  anonymous 
Anabaptist  by  a  "  principall  Elder,  in  and  of  that  Seperation  ", 
as  "  H.  N."  was  popularly  but  mistakenly  supposed  to  be.  No 
doubt  "I.  P." 's  view  is  at  least  in  part  correct,  but  it  seems  to 
me  probable  that  the  writer  of  the  letter  himself  signed  it  in 
this  way,  in  order  to  conceal  his  identity  in  case  the  letter  was 
intercepted,  while  the  signature  "  H.  N."  would  be  easily  under- 
stood by  those  to  whom  his  missive  was  sent. 

The  contents  of  the  letter  indicate  that  the  writer  held  the 
views  of  John  Murton.  He  gives  no  evidence  of  yet  having 
any  interest  in  the  Family  of  Love  except  by  the  use  of  the 
signature  "H.N."     In  closing  the  writer  says  that  he  sends 

1  See  "Persecution  for  Religion  Judg'd  and  Condemn'd",  1662,  pp.  49- 
50.  This  pamphlet  was  reprinted  in  modernized  text  in  the  Hanserd 
Knollys  Society's  edition  of  "  Tracts  on  Liberty  of  Conscience  ",  London, 
1846,  pp.  83-231,  of  which  "An  Humble  Supplication"  occupies  pages 
181-231.     In  the  edition  of  1662  see  p.  190  for  the  above  citation. 


266  Early  English  Dissenters 

"  one  booke  to  Master  Strowd,  one  to  Goodman  Ball,  one  to 
Mistris  Fountaine,  one  to  Roger  Seely,  one  to  Samuel  Quash, 
and  one  to  "  the  person  to  whom  the  letter  was  directed,  all  of 
them  being  at  that  time  members  of  the  Church  of  England. 
The  book  sent  was  possibly  John  Murton's  previously  mentioned 
"A  Discription ",  1620,  the  last  known  publication  of  the  early 
English  Arminian,  or  General,  Anabaptists.  Of  the  six  persons 
to  whom  this  book  was  sent  none  appears  to-day  to  be  known, 
but  there  is  a  possibility  that  "Mistris  Fountaine"  was  the 
wife  of  a  Mr  Fountain  who  is  mentioned  in  "  Numb:  4  "  of  the 
Gould  Manuscripts  as  being  in  1644  a  member  of  Henry 
Jessey's  congregation. 

We  are  told  by  "  I.  P."  that  the  writer  of  this  letter  of 
May  10,  1622,  had  returned  to  the  fold  of  the  Church  of 
England  by  1623,  and  it  seems  highly  probable,  therefore,  that 
he  was  none  other  than  Edmond  Jessop,  who  having  renounced 
his  Anabaptism,  published  at  London  in  1623  "A  |  DIS- 
COVERY j  OF  THE  ERRORS  |  OF  THE  ENGLISH  | 
ANABAPTISTS.  \  . . .".  Certainly  his  case  admirably  fits  the 
situation. 

Like  many  others  of  his  time  Jessop  had  evidently  gone 
"from  one  forme  of  religion  vnto  another",  and  had  finally 
become  an  Anabaptist,  as  he  expresses  it,  "  wandring  vp  and 
downe  amongst  the  drie  hils  and  mountaines,  conceiuing  com- 
fort, when  alas  I  [he]  was  far  from  it ;  and ",  says  he,  "  the 
farther  I  wandred  vp  and  downe  in  that  Egyptian  darknesse, 
the  more  intricate  labyrinth  of  error  and  darknesse  my  soule 
was  plunged  into;... and  especially  when  I  walked  with  the 
Anabaptists,... all  which  time,  though  strangely  deluded,  yet 
was  I  kept  by  the  power  and  prouidence  of  God  from  being 
seduced  and  led  into  that  destroying  and  irrecouerable  way  of 
death  before  mentioned,  namely,  the  Familists,  though  very 
nigh  vnto  it,  hauing  one  foote  entred  therein,  whiles  I  walked 
with  the  people  aforesaid  [i.e.,  the  Anabaptists]."  During  this 
experience  he  says  God  laid  "  the  rod  of  correction  "  upon  him, 
evidently  in  the  form  of  imprisonment,  and  by  this  salutary 

'  An  extended  account  of  thia  MS.  ia  given  later  in  this  volume. 


The  Co7igregation  of  Hekvys  and  Mnrtoii    267 

means,  which  served  to  induce  deeper  meditation,  he  was  soon 
persuaded  to  reject  his  "  former  receiued  opinions,  as  erronious 
and  wicked ",  and  at  last  to  find  peace  in  the  Church  of 
England.  Now,  therefore,  in  1623  having  gone  through  what 
he  had  come  to  consider  an  unfortunate  and  painful  experience 
of  uncertainty,  he  published  this  work  to  dissuade  others  from 
undertaking  a  similar  course.  The  manner  in  which  the 
English  Anabaptists  of  that  time  administered  baptism  is  not 
mentioned  in  this  work,  a  significant  fact,  which  undoubtedly 
indicates  that  dipping  or  immersion  had  not  yet  begun  to  be 
practised  by  them. 

Jessop  has  nothing  to  say  in  praise  of  the  English  Ana- 
baptists. On  the  contrary,  he  speaks  of  them  as  "this  little 
silly  sect  of  English  Anabaptists...,  who  (poore  people)  though 
he  [Satan]  haue  much  possessed  their  minds  with  error,  yet 
there  is  some  hope  that  they  will  be  reclaimed,  because  it 
appeareth  plainly  (with  some  of  them)  that  they  are  caried 
thorough  zeale,  being  raeerly  seduced  by  such  as  haue  beene 
longest  settled  in  the  deceit  "^ 

Still  another  book  appeared  against  the  Anabaptists  in  the 
year  1623, — an  occurrence  which  seems  to  justify  the  belief  that 
the  cause  of  Anabaptism  was  making  progress  in  England,  or 
among  the  English,  about  this  time.  This  third  work  was  pub- 
lished by  Henry  Ainsworth  and  is  entitled,  "A  |  CENSVRE  | 
UPON  A  DIALOGVE  OF  THE  |  Anabaptists,  Intituled,  A 
DescHption  of  \  ivhat  God  hath  Predestinated  concer-\ning  man, 
&c.  I  ...",  4°,  pp.  iv,  64.  Dr  Dexter  knew  of  no  copy  of  the 
edition  of  1623. 

The  publication  of  these  books  just  at  this  date  also  in- 
dicates that  people  were  beginning  to  awaken  to  the  fact  that 
something  must  be  done  to  stop  the  spread  of  Anabaptism.  In 
fact,  according  to  a  letter  written  on  Sept.  4,  1622 2,  even  King 
James  I  and  Archbishop  Abbot  were  becoming  anxious  at 
hearing  every  day  "  of  soe  manie  defeccions  from  our  Religion, 
both  to  Poperie  and  Anabaptisme,  or  other  points  of  Separacion, 
in  some  parts  of  this  kingdome  ". 

1  In  the  "  Epistle  Dedicatorie  ",  p.  v. 

2  Add.  MS.  G394,  fol.  29-30,  in  the  British  Museum. 


268  Early  English  Dissenters 

In  1624  appeared  two  other  important  answers  to  Murton's 
"  A  Discription  ",  One  was  by  John  Robinson,  a  scarce  work 
entitled,  "A  |  DEFENCE  |  OF  THE  DOC- 1 TRINE  PRO- 
POVN-JDED  BY  THE  SYNODE  |  AT  DORT:  \  AGAINST  \ 
lOHN  MVRTON  AND  |  HIS  ASSOCIATES,  IN  A  |  Treatise 
intituled;  A  Description  \  what  God,  &c.  |  WITH  \  THE 
REFVTATION  OF  [  their  Answer  to  a  Writing  touching  I, 
BAPTISM."  This  is  a  quarto  consisting  of  iv  +  203  pages. 
The  other  book  bore  the  following  title :  "THE  ]  PATRIMONY  j 
OF  CHRISTIAN  |  CHILDREN :  |  Or,  |  A  DEFENCE  OF 
INFANTS  I  Babtisme  prooued  to  be  consonant  to  |  the  Scrip- 
tures and  will  of  GoD  (against  |  the  erroneons  [erroneous] 
positions  of  the  |  Anabaptists.  |  By  Robert  Cleaver,  with 
the  I  ioynt  consent  of  M"".  loHN  DoD.  |  ...",  London,  4°,  1624, 
pp.  xvi,  90,  ii,  the  first  two,  and  last  two,  pages  blank.  This 
latter  work  is  written  in  an  admirable  spirit,  and  since  it  is  as 
yet  practically  unknown,  the  following  citation  from  the  "Preface 
to  the  Reader"  may  prove  of  interest^ : — 

Our  dales  susteine  the  assaults  especially  of  the  Papists,  the  Ar- 
minians,  the  Familists,  and  the  Anabaptists,  who  following  the 
Arminians  in  some  opinions,  and  confirmed  by  their  Arguments, 
goe  before  them  in  others,  whence  they  haue  growen  very  hurtfull 
and  infestuous  to  many.  Now  for  their  sakes  together  with  others, 
in  a  louing  desire  to  reduce  them,  and  for  a  preseruatiue  to  such  as 
might  be  infected  by  them,  we  haue  both  priuatly  according  to 
requests  beene  prest,  and  ready  to  debate  the  matter,  and  now 
publikely  to  the  view  of  the  world,  haue  declared  our  selues  in  this 
argument. 

Wee  stand  not  vp  against  them  in  way  of  opposition,  as  Anta- 
gonists, or  as  challengers  in  a  combate,  but  in  pittie,  and  compassion 

^  Sig.  B2  recto  and  verso.  In  introducing  the  "Errata"  the  following 
quaint  remark  is  made : — 

"  rrMIe  Reader  is  to  be  intreated  with  patience  to  heare  xoith  many  faults 
-JL  committed,  partly  by  the  Scribe  who  ivas  vsed  in  the  transcription 
and  writiyig  out  of  the  copy  for  the  Presse,  and  partly  by  those  which  were 
imployed  in  the  Print-house:  as  first  in  mispointing,  Commaes  being  put 
for  Colons  ;  Colons  for  Periods;  Periods  for  Interrogations,  and  contrarily: 
so  that  it  is  hard  in  some  places  to  finde  where  a  sentence,  yea,  or  a  section 
beginneth  or  endeth,  whereby  the  sense  is  much  obscured.  Secondly,  by 
misplacing  of  many  Quotacians  in  the  Ifargent;  and  altogether  leaning 
out  of  some  such  texts  as  are  the  foundations  of  maine  arguments  there 
vrged,..." 


The  Congregation  of  Helioys  and  Murton    269 

at  the  sight  of  their  miserable  fals,  we  as  friends  call  vpon  them  to 
recouer  themselues,  and  rise  vp  againe  from  the  danger  of  destruction, 
which  they  incurre  by  passing  so  cruell  a  sentence,  and  desperate 
doome  vpon  many  millions  of  Gods  holy  seruants,  as  haue  dedicated 
their  yong  children  to  the  Lord  by  Baptisme,  that  solemne  and 
sacred  Seale  of  his  Couenant.  If  the  matter  be  brought  to  ex- 
amination and  sifting,  wee  hope  that  nothing  will  he  found  herein, 
but  that  Avhich  will  abide  the  touch-stone  of  the  Word  :  but  being 
men,  and  not  hauing  an  Apostolicall  spirit  of  infalabilitie,  we  dare 
not  arrogate  too  much  to  out  [our]  selues :  onely  this  wee  can  in  the 
vprightnesse  of  our  hearts  affirnie,  that  if  ought  haue  passed  our 
pen,  that  is  not  Orthodoxe,  and  currant :  Jit  quia  latet  Veritas^  non 
quod  indulgetur  errori:  Wee  will  not  stand  obstinately  in  the  defence 
of  any  thing  that  shall  appeare  to  be  vnsound.  It  shall  not  be 
needful!  for  vs,  as  we  thinke,  to  make  any  large  Apollogie  for  the 
enterprising  of  this  businesse,  sithence  the  motiues  that  incited  vs 
vnto  it,  and  the  end  wee  haue  aimed  at  in  it,  will  vndoubtedly 
worke  a  charitable  construction  of  our  writing,  in  all  vnpartiall  and 
iudicious  persons,  that  duly  apprehend  the  same  :  and  therefore  be 
informed  (good  Reader)  that  vnderstanding  of  the  industry,  and 
great  paines  of  them  that  are  deceiued  in  this  point,  to  deceiue 
others  :  and  that  with  diuers  of  good  note  in  pietie,  they  haue 
preuailed  too  farre  :  and  being  intreated  by  some,  to  administer 
helpe,  and  assistance  to  themselues,  and  their  endangered  friends, 
we  durst  not  violate  the  precept  of  the  Apostle,  inioyning  vs  to 
contend  for  the  maintenance  of  the  common  faith. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  ENGLISH   GENERAL,   OR  ARMINIAN,    ANABAPTISTS 
BETWEEN   1624   AND   1642 

We  have  already  seen  that  before  1620  Anabaptist  congre- 
gations may  possibly  have  been  organized  in  various  counties 
of  England,  but  before  1624  nothing  definite  is  to  be  learned 
relating  to  them  or  even  to  the  internal  affairs  of  the  congre- 
gation in  London.  From  several  letters  preserved  in  the 
Mennonite  Archives  in  Amsterdam  (texts  of  which  are  given 
in  the  volume  of  documents),  however,  we  gain  considerable 
information  concerning  these  churches  during  the  years  1624  to 
1630.  It  appears  from  the  papers  in  Amsterdam,  for  instance, 
that  before  May,  1624,  sixteen  persons  including  one  Elias 
Tookey  had  been  excommunicated  by  John  Murton's  congre- 
gation in  London,  and  had  formed  a  church  of  their  own  in  that 
city,  but  had  not  as  yet  ventured  to  ordain  a  minister.  Tookey 
and  his  associates,  we  are  told,  decided  to  apply  for  union  with 
the  Waterlanders,  perhaps  hoping  through  them  to  secure 
proper  ordination  for  whomsoever  they  should  choose  as  a  pastor. 
They  accordingly  sent  a  letter  by  messengers  to  Amsterdam  to 
prefer  this  request.  The  Waterlanders  cautioned  them  not  to 
organize  a  separate  congregation  until  they  had  joined  a  true 
Church.  Thus  far  no  word  from  Murton  had  come  to  the 
Waterlanders,  nor  had  they  been  up  to  that  time  fully  able  to 
understand  all  that  Tookey  had  said  in  his  letter.  They  ad- 
vised him,  therefore,  to  be  patient,  and  said  that  if  Murton 
should  send  them  adverse  information,  they  would  nevertheless 
be  impartial  in  their  judgment  of  both  parties.  They  also 
wished  further  particulars  concerning  Tookey 's  opinions. 


English  Anabaptists  hetiveen  1624  and  1642    271 

In  compliance  with  this  request  Tookey  wrote  another 
letter  in  which  the  following  points  concerning  his  congre- 
gation appear.  Though  not  fully  organized  they  celebrated 
the  Lord's  Supper,  and  probably  baptism,  through  the  agency 
of  some  lay  member  whom  the  congregation  appointed. 
They  did  not  believe  in  ordaining  a  minister  without  the 
assistance  of  properly  ordained  ministers.  They  also  did  not 
hold  that  there  was  any  excuse  for  them  to  flee  into  a  foreign 
country  on  account  of  persecution.  The  members  had  per- 
mitted two  or  three  persons  to  remain  in  their  communion  who 
were  not  perfectly  settled  in  their  belief  concerning  Christ's 
deity, — a  permission  which  had  been  granted,  because  these 
persons  were  peaceably  disposed  and  believed  that  their  salva- 
tion depended  alone  upon  Christ.  This  congregation  like  that 
of  Helwys  and  Murton  maintained  that  it  was  almost  necessary 
for  peaceable  people  in  England  to  be  willing  to  take  such  an 
oath  as  the  Oath  of  Allegiance.  None  of  the  members  would 
become  magistrates  or  carry  arms,  some  of  them  taking  this 
position  for  the  sake  of  conscience,  others  for  the  sake  of  peace. 
The  wish  is  expressed  that  the  Waterlanders  might  write  a  few 
words  to  Murton  and  his  people  with  the  hope  of  establishing 
harmony  between  the  two  companies,  and  Tookey  said  that 
they  themselves  would  strive  as  much  as  possible  toward  that 
end.  Many  of  Murton's  followers,  he  said,  were  willing  to  be 
tolerant,  and  two  of  them  especially  had  even  been  giving 
attention  to  the  doctrine  of  succession,  and  desired  to  know  if 
the  Mennonites  could  give  satisfactory  proof  that  their  be- 
ginnings could  be  traced  back  to  the  time  of  the  Apostles. 

When  the  Waterlanders  received  this  fuller  account  of 
Tookey 's  views,  they  seem  to  have  been  less  favourably  im- 
pressed than  at  first  with  the  advisability  of  a  union  with  his 
company,  and  especially  because  the  latter,  though  so  few  in 
number,  were  nevertheless  not  even  united  in  their  opinions 
concerning  such  a  weighty  point  as  the  deity  of  Christ,  any 
disbelief  in  which  on  their  part,  in  case  of  the  consummation 
of  the  proposed  union,  might  bring  the  Waterlanders  into 
trouble  with  the  Dutch  authorities,  who  were  constantly  on 
the  look-out  for  heresy.     The  Waterlanders  were  also  disturbed 


272  Early  English  Dissenters 

by  Tookey's  ideas  concerning  the  taking  of  an  oath,  and 
accordingly  decided  that  they  did  not  wish  to  think  of  any 
union  until  these  objectionable  views  were  altered. 

Upon  learning  this  decision  Tookey  wrote  a  letter  on 
March  17,  1624/25,  chiefly  relating  to  the  deity  of  Christ,  and 
still  urged  the  suggested  union.  The  number  of  his  company 
had  now  decreased  to  fifteen.  By  December  3,  1625,  Hans  de 
Ries  wrote  to  Tookey  that  the  Waterlanders  had  finally  ceased 
to  criticize  his  position  with  regard  to  the  deity  of  Christ  and 
would  bind  no  one  to  dogmatic  formulas,  but  expressed  their 
strong  convictions  against  the  taking  of  an  oath  and  the  carry- 
ing of  arms,  and  it  was  undoubtedly  on  account  of  their  varying 
opinions  concerning  these  last-named  points  that  the  two  parties 
had  not  been  united  previous  to  Nov,  13,  1626.  Before  that 
date  the  membership  of  Tookey's  company  had  increased  to 
eighteen  persons ^ 

At  the  time  when  Tookey  was  excommunicated  Murton  was 
still  living,  and  he  was  very  likely  alive  on  Mar.  17,  1624/25, 
but  apparently  between  that  date  and  November  12,  1620,  he 
had  died.  I  well  realize  that  this  was  not  the  opinion  of  the 
late  Rev.  Morton  Dexter 2,  who  thought  that  Murton  was  probably 
living  as  late  as  1646,  but  this  was  clearly  a  mistake.  Surely 
we  cannot  draw  the  inference  that  Murton  was  then  alive 
merely  on  the  ground  that  John  Wilkinson's  little  work,  re- 
lating to  him  and  entitled,  "  The  Sealed  Fovntaine ",  was 
published  in  1646  !  If  Mr  Dexter  had  opened  this  diminutive 
book  and  read  its  real  title  on  page  1  as  well  as  the  Epistle  of 
the  editor,  William  Arthurbury,  he  would  have  quickly  seen 
that  the  tract  was  written  against  Murton  in  1613,  and  that  it 
was  printed  in  1646  only  as  being  in  Arthurbury 's  opinion  a 
useful  little  treatise,  which  deserved  publication  even  though 
the  author  and  his  opponent  were  long  since  dead. 

Even  after  Murton's  death  the  breach  between  Tookey's 
and  Murton's  congregations  had  not  been  healed,  but  we  hear 

1  See   Dr  B.  Evans'  "The  Early  English  Baptists",   London,    1861, 
Vol.  II.,  p.  40. 

2  "  The  England  and  Holland  of  the  Pilgrims  ",  London,  1906,  p.  385 
note  6. 


English  Anabaptists  betiveen  1624  and  1642     273 

practically  nothing  more  of  Tookey  or  his  followers.  Murton's 
company,  likewise,  after  the  death  of  their  old  leaders  also 
entertained  the  hope  of  a  union  with  the  Waterlanders,  and 
sent  a  Latin  letter  to  them  by  two  trusted  messengers.  This 
letter,  dated  Nov.  12,  1626  (New  Syle),  states  that  there 
were  five  Anabaptist  churches  then  in  England, — namely,  at 
London,  Lincoln,  Sarum,  Coventry,  and  Tiverton.  At  some 
of  these  places  Anabaptists  may  have  been  persecuted  even 
before  1620,  as  is  suggested  in  the  previously  mentioned 
"  Supplication "  of  that  year.  If  Tookey's  company  was  still 
in  existence,  there  is  no  reference  here  concerning  it.  The 
members  of  the  Anabaptist  congregations  had  read  the  pub- 
lished Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Waterlanders,  and  found 
that  they  agreed  with  them  in  all  points  except  that  of  the 
oath,  but  they  say  that  they  also  believe  that  the  Lord's  Supper 
may  be  celebrated  every  Sunday,  that  any  church  member,  as 
such,  may  preach  or  administer  the  Communion  or  baptism  in 
the  pastor's  absence,  and  that  Christians  may  hold  the  position 
of  magistrate  and  other  worldly  offices.  In  1626  the  total 
number  of  Anabaptists  in  the  five  congregations  in  England 
was  at  least  one  hundred  and  fifty. 

When  the  two  messengers  sent  by  the  five  English  churches 
came  to  Hans  de  Ries,  he  asked  them  certain  questions  which 
he  noted  down  with  the  answers  given  to  them.  From  these 
replies  we  learn  that  the  five  churches  did  not  all  have 
ministers,  in  other  words,  were  not  all  fully  organized,  and 
consequently  did  not  all  have  regular  services.  Accordingly, 
when  a  congregation  wished  to  celebrate  Communion,  it  would 
wait  until  its  turn  came  for  the  visit  of  a  minister.  In  fact, 
Murton's  death  may  have  left  these  churches  without  sufficient 
good  leaders,  and  this  may  have  been  the  chief  cause  for  their 
seeking  a  union  with  the  Waterlanders. 

On  Nov.  25,  1626,  Hans  de  Ries  wrote  to  the  English  con- 
gregations saying  that  their  letter  and  the  visit  of  their  two 
messengers  were  most  welcome,  but  that,  on  account  of  their 
opinions  concerning  the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  the 
taking  of  an  oath,  and  the  holding  of  government  positions, 
such  a  union  as  they  desired  was  impossible.  Here,  then,  for 
B.  18 


274  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  time  the  matter  of  a  general  union  between  the  early 
English  Anabaptist  congregations  and  the  Waterlanders  seems 
to  have  been  allowed  to  stand. 

Mr  Adam  Taylor  says  that  there  "  is  some  reason  to  believe 
that,  in  A.D.  1626,  there  was  a  general  baptist  church  at 
Amersham,  in  Buckinghamshire"',  and  that  "Tradition  places 
the  origin  of  the  general  baptist  church  at  Eyeihorn,  in  this 
county  [Kent],  towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  queen  Elizabeth, 
about  A.D.  1590".  "  For  some  time  ",  he  continues,  "  the  mem- 
bers of  this  society  met  for  social  worship  in  private  houses: 
particularly  at  the  house  of  one  of  their  friends  at  Street- 
end.  The  owner  of  this  house  bequeathed  a  small  annuity  for 
the  support  of  the  cause;  which  like  many  similar  bequests, 
has  long  been  lost.  In  1624,  the  number  of  the  members  was 
upwards  of  twenty ;..."'' 

Dr  B.  Evans  ^  also,  speaks  of  the  "  Baptist  church  at  Stoney 
Stratford "  which  dates  "  its  origin ",  he  says,  "  as  early  as 
1625 ",  and  of  one  "  Thomas  Brewer,  '  a  zealous  minister  of 
the  Baptist  persuasion ' ",  who  was  arrested  as  early  as  1626, 
being  "  a  preacher  among  the  Separatists  in  and  about  Ashford, 
in  Kent ". 

We  need  pay  but  little  attention  to  these  statements,  for 
we  can  be  perfectly  certain  that  the  congregations  mentioned 
were  not  Anabaptist  at  the  dates  given,  or  reference  would 
have  been  made  to  them  in  letters  preserved  in  the  Mennonite 
Archives.  However,  there  may  have  been  separatist  (Brownist 
or  Barrowist)  congregations  in  Amersham,  "  Eyethorn "  and 
Stony  Stratford  in  1626,  1624,  and  1625  respectively,  from 
which  General  Anabaptist  congregations  were  probably  de- 
veloped after  1640.  As  to  Brewer,  Fenner,  Turner,  and  the 
other  separatists  at  Ashford  and  Maidstone  in  Kent,  about 
1626,  we  now  know  that  as  late  as  1638^  they  were  not  Ana- 
baptists, but  Brownists  or  Barrowists. 

1  "  The  History  of  the  English  General  Baptists  ",  Part  First,  London, 
1818,  p.  96. 

2  Ihid.,  p.  281. 

3  "  The  Early  English  Baptists  ",  Vol.  il.,  London,  1864,  pp.  54-7. 

*  "The  Works  of... William  Laud,  D.D."  (Oxford,  1847-60,  in  7  vols.), 


English  Anabaptists  bettveen  1624  a^td  1642    275 

In  1630  another  attempt  at  union  with  the  Waterlanders 
was  evidently  undertaken  by  the  English  General  Anabap- 
tists, and  a  letter  was  sent  from  the  Waterland  congregation 
in  Amsterdam  to  the  Anabaptist  church  at  Lincoln,  asking 
especially  for  further  information  concerning  their  views  on  the 
subject  of  excommunication,  which  had  struck  the  Water- 
landers  as  being  rather  narrow-minded.  No  beneficial  result 
seems  to  have  been  secured  by  this  correspondence.  In  1634 
the  Lincoln  Anabaptists  appear  to  have  been  fairly  numerous, 
and  at  that  time  had  for  their  leader,  one  Johnson  a  baker^ 

On  Sept.  13,  1630,  the  Waterlanders  also  sent  a  letter  to 
the  Anabaptist  congregation  at  Tiverton  stating  among  other 
things  what  attitude  they  would  take  toward  a  member  of  one 
of  their  churches  who  should  hear  a  sermon  in  [the  Church  of?] 
England,  and  objecting  to  the  English  Anabaptists'  defence  of 
the  use  of  the  sword,  etc.  To  this  last  mentioned  letter  James 
Toppe  (not  Joppe  as  printed  by  Dr  B.  Evans)  and  his  wife  Isabel 
responded  in  an  undated  letter  supporting  their  position,  and 
declaring  it  to  be  the  fault  of  the  Dutch,  not  of  the  English,  that  a 
union  between  them  had  not  yet  taken  place.  For  the  perusal  of 
the  Waterlanders,  both  of  these  letters  were  apparently  translated 
into  Dutch  by  Swithune  Gryndall  [Grindall]^  in  May  and  June 
respectively,  1631.  Anabaptist  interest  in  Tiverton  evidently 
continued  unbroken  as  late  as  1639,  and  probably  later,  for  on 
October  10  of  that  year  one  John  Fort,  a  clothier  there,  is  men- 
tioned as  having  been  fined  five  hundred  pounds  for  Anabaptism 

Vol.  v.,  Part  II.,  1853,  pp.  323,  331,  336,  347,  and  355.  See  also 
Mr  Edward  Arbor's  "The  Story  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  1897,  pp.  246-47, 
etc. 

1  "The  Works  of.. .William  Laud,  D.D.",  Vol.  v.,  Part  ii.,  1853,  p.  326. 
"For  Lincoln  itself,  my  vicar-general  certifies  me,  there  are  many  ana- 
baptists in  it,  and  that  their  leader  is  one  Johnson  a  baker;..." 

2  Swithune  Grindall  was  a  native  of  Tunstal  in  Yorkshire,  and 
apparently  came  to  Amsterdam  in  1616  and  joined  the  English- 
Dutch  congregation.  He  was  then  22  years  old  and  is  described  as 
a  "  legatuunverker ".  He  married  on  May  2,  1615,  Margriete  Moritz 
of  Scheckbye  in  Nottinghamshire,  who  was  two  years  his  senior.  See 
the  "Transactions"  of  the  Congregational  Historical  Society,  Vol.  ii., 
No.  3,  for  September,  1905,  pp.  167-68. 

18—2 


276  Early  English  Dissenters 

by  the  Court  of  High  Commission^  On  Feb.  22, 1640,  the  fine, 
which  had  evidently  been  paid  in,  was  returned'*.  In  another 
entry  concerning  Fort,  as  printed  in  the  Calendar  of  State  Papers, 
there  is  a  query  as  to  whether  the  name  Fort  is  not  really  Topp^ 
This  reading  would  accord  so  well  with  further  information  that 
I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  John  Fort  was  none  other  than 
James  Topp  [Toppe].  That  he  was  a  clothier  is  a  point  of 
interest. 

We  thus  learn  for  the  first  time  the  correct  name  of  one 
of  the  prominent  early  English  Anabaptists  after  the  death 
of  John  Murton.  Jacobus,  or  James,  Toppe  was  apparently 
the  recognized  leader,  and  possibly  the  pastor,  of  the  Ana- 
baptist church  at  Tiverton.  Very  likely  he  was  its  organizer. 
Though  little  is  known  about  him,  it  seems  that  he  became 
in  time  a  staunch  millenarian,  and  lived  until  1642  or  later, 
about  which  time  we  hear  of  him  as  being  engaged  in  a  con- 
troversy with  Leonard  Busher. 

This  brings  us  to  the  career  of  "  Mark,  Leonard  Busher ", 
which  we  may  now  conveniently  study.  The  earliest  reference 
to  Busher  that  I  remember  to  have  seen,  is  given  in  "The 
Prophane  Schisme  of  the  Brownists  or  Separatists",  1612^ 
wherein  he  appears  to  be  included  among  the  English  Ana- 
baptists then  residing  in  Holland,  and  is  mentioned  as  holding 
different  views  from  either  John  Smyth  or  Thomas  Helwys. 
About  1613  he  seems  to  have  written  his  work  entitled 
"  Religions  Peace ",  which  was  printed  at  London  in  1614. 
When  he  wrote  this  tract,  Busher  was  evidently  in  Holland^ 
not  in  London  as  has  generally  been  supposed.  However,  he 
naturally  styles  himself  a  "  Citizen  of  London  ",  since  his  home 
was  there,  and  since  he  desired  to  indicate  to  King  James  and 
the  Parliament,  that  although  he  was  living  in  Holland,  he  was 

1  See  "Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,... Charles  I.  1640", 
London,  1880,  p.  399. 

2  Ibid.  3  ji^d.,  p.  391. 
*  P.  56. 

°  As  is  shown  in  the  following  words  (Hanserd  Knollys  Society  edition, 
p.  31) :  "  But  when  they  come  hither,  or  to  some  other  free  city  or 
covmtry,  where  (praised  be  God)  is  liberty  of  the  gospel,..." 


English  Anabaptists  between  1624  and  1642    277 

in  exile  and  was  really  a  loyal  English  citizen.  The  exact 
and  complete  title  of  the  original  edition  of  this  treatise  is  not 
at  present  known,  as  no  copy  of  it  is  apparently  in  existence 
to-day,  and  as  certain  changes  seem  to  have  been  made  in  the 
title-page  of  the  edition  of  1646  ^ 

When  Busher  wrote  this  work,  he  was  evidently  persecuted 
and  poor,  but  very  desirous  to  publish  his  views  against  his 
opponents,  for  he  says;  "we  that  have  most  truth  are  most 
persecuted ;  and  therefore  most  poore,  whereby  we  are  unable 
to  write  and  print  as  we  would  against  the  adversaries  of  the 
truth  "I 

He  had  apparently  already  written  another  tract  which  he 
calls  "a  scourge  of  small  cords,  wherewith  Antichrist  and  his 
Ministers  might  be  driven  out  of  the  Temple  of  God.  Also  a 
declaration  of  certain  false  translations  in  the  new  Testament." 
This  was  evidently  intended  to  be  one  book,  for,  says  Busher, 
"  I  want  wherewith  to  print  and  publish  it  "^  He  also  had  sent 
a  writing  of  his  to  John  Robinson  six  months  before  he  wrote 
"Religions  Peace",  but  could  obtain  no  answer  from  him*,  and 
even  after  a  whole  year's  waiting,  he  tells  us,  he  had  still 
received  no  reply". 

In  "  Religions  Peace "  Busher  championed  the  cause  of 
believers',  or  adult,  baptism  by  dipping  or  immersion  nearly 
thirty  years  before  the  Calvinistic,  or  Particular,  English  Ana- 
baptists adopted  it  as  the  only  correct  manner  in  which  to 
administer  that  ordinance.  Busher  maintains  that  Christians 
should  "  preach  the  word  of  salvation  to  every  creature  of  all 
sorts  of  nations,  that  are  worthy  and  willing  to  receive  it.  And 
such  as  shall  willingly  and  gladly  receive  it ",  he  says,  "  he 
[Christ]  hath  commanded  to  be  baptized  in  the  water ;  that  is, 

1  The  title-page  of  the  edition  of  1646  reads:  "RELIGIONS] 
PEACE :  I  OR,  |  A  PLEA  for  Liberty  of  |  Conscience.  |  Long  since 
presented  to  King  James,  \  and  the  High  Court  of  Parliament  then  | 
sitting,  by  Leonard  Busher  Citizen  of  London,  \  and  Printed  in  the  Yeare 
1614.  I  ...",  London,  1646,  4°,  pp.  ii,  vi,  38.  The  edition  of  1646  was 
reprinted  by  the  Hanserd  Knollys  Society  in  a  volume  of  "Tracts  on 
Liberty  of  Conscience",  1846,  pp.  1-81. 

2  Pp.  33-4.  3  P.  34. 

*  Hanserd  Knollys  Society  edition,  p.  52.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  52,  note. 


278  Early  English  Dissenters 

dipped  for  dead  in  the  water.  And  therefore  the  apostle  saith, 
Else  what  shall  they  do,  who  are  baptized  for  dead,  if  the  dead 
he  not  raised,  why  are  they  baptized  for  dead  ?  And  therefore 
he  saith,  We  are  buried  then  with  him  by  baptism,  <fcc."^ 

In  this  work  it  would  almost  appear  as  if  Busher  was 
not  pleading  for  any  particular  body  of  separatists,  but  on 
the  contrary  was  only  advocating  a  general  separation  from 
the  authority  of  Archbishops  and  Bishops,  and  appealing  for 
protection  from  their  decrees.  He  does  not  directly  advocate 
Anabaptism,  nor  does  he  expressly  oppose  the  baptism  of 
infants,  but  from  the  above  passage  we  may  judge  that  he  was 
at  this  time  antagonistic  to  the  latter  and  favourable  to  the 
former.  The  work  is  clearly  written  and  unusually  well  thought 
out  for  that  day^ 

After  1614  we  do  not  hear  of  Busher  again  for  many  years, 
when  on  December  8,  1642,  we  find  him  still  in  Holland  in  the 
city  of  Delft.  On  that  date  he  wrote  a  piteous  letter  in  Dutch 
to  "Abram  Derikson",  saying  that  he  has  sent  several  letters 
to  him  without  receiving  any  answer,  and  that  he  is  a  weak 
old  man  of  advanced  (71)  years,  now  lying  under  his  load 
(?  of  care  and  age)  without  any  one  to  help  him.  He  asks  that 
he  may  receive  assistance,  so  that  he  may  not  remain  in  this 
lonely  condition,  but  may  be  treated  in  a  more  brotherly 
fashion,  since  he,  as  well  as  Derikson,  believes  that  Jesus  is  the 
Messiah.     He  should,  therefore,  be  treated  as  a  brother,  and 

^  "  Tracts  on  Liberty  of  Conscience ",  etc.  (Hanserd  KnoUys  Society), 
London,  1846,  pp.  59-60. 

2  It  would  have  been  practically  impossible  for  a  young  Dutchman  to 
have  written  such  excellent  English,  and  though  Busher  shows  that  he 
knows  Dutch  and  was  evidently  in  Holland  when  he  wrote  his  works,  he 
calls  himself  "your  [King  James  I's]  faithful  and  loving  subject",  and 
refers  to  "our  land  of  Great  Britain",  etc.,— remarks  which  leave  no 
doubt  as  to  his  nationality.  For  these  and  other  reasons  stated  elsewhere 
the  author  finds  himself  quite  unable  to  agree  with  the  conclusions  advanced 
by  Dr  W.  T.  Whitley  in  his  article  entitled  "  Leonard  Busher,  Dutchman  " 
("Transactions  of  the  Baptist  Historical  Society"  for  April,  1909,  Vol.  I., 
No.  2,  pp.  107-113).  English,  not  Dutch,  was  Busher's  native  tongue, 
and  whether  his  ancestry  was  Dutch  or  not,  his  name  even  as  spelled  at 
Delft  in  1642  is  English. 


English  Anabaptists  hetioeen  1624  and  1642    279 

not  in  this  unfriendly  manner.  He  hopes  for  an  early  answer, 
and  signs  himself,  "  Your  obedient  servant  [?]  &  desolate  brother 
in  Christ,  Mark  Leonard  Busher." 

About  this  time,  or  a  little  later,  we  find  Busher  engaged  in 
the  previously  mentioned  controversy  with  James  Toppe  con- 
cerning the  second  coming  of  Christ.  This  controversy  arose 
in  the  following  manner.  Toppe  had  been  requested  by  a 
friend  to  write  a  few  lines  "  to  proue  Christes  Monarchicall 
reigne  over  all  the  kingedomes  of  this  world  ".  His  opinions 
thus  privately  expressed  came  into  the  hands  of  "  Mr.  mark, 
Leonard  Busher  "  who  was  then  living  in  Delft  in  Holland,  and 
who  undertook  to  write  an  answer.  Therewith,  he  also  wrote 
a  reply  to  a  part  of  Mr  John  Archer's  work  on  the  same  sub- 
ject, issued  at  London  in  1642  and  entitled,  "THE  |  PER- 
SONALL  I  REIGNE  OF  ]  CHRIST  |  VPON  EARTH.  |  In 
a  Treatise  wherein  is  fully  and  largely  |  laid  open  and  proved, 
That  lesus  Christ,  toge- 1  ther  with  the  Saints,  shall  visibly  pos- 
sesse  a  |  Monarchicall  State  and  Kingdom  \  in  this  World.  \  ...", 
London,  4°,  pp.  ii,  54. 

These  replies  together  with  Toppe's  opinions  Busher  pub- 
lished, but  at  present  no  copy  of  the  book  seems  to  be  known. 
After  the  appearance  of  this  work  Toppe  penned  an  answer 
to  it,  which,  though  never  printed,  I  have  fortunately  dis- 
covered in  the  original  manuscript.  It  is  entitled,  "  CHRISTS 
MONARCHL|call,  and  personall  Reigne  vppon  Earth:  over] 
all  the  Kingedoms  of  this  world,  Reu:  |  11.  15.  17.  Dan:  7. 
14.  27:  I  Or  an  Epistell  to  his  Lovinge  frind  M"".  [mark,  Leonard^] 
Busher  In  w*^^  is  |  allso  shewed  the  tyme  when  [?]  this  kingdom 
shall  begin  &  [?]  where  it  shalbe  |  ..."  This  document  is  un- 
dated, but  was  evidently  written  in  1642  or  soon  after. 

Although  the  work  is  imperfect  at  the  end,  its  discovery 
is  of  considerable  interest,  as  it  gives  the  hitherto  unsuspected 
opinions  of  one  who  had  been,  and  probably  still  was,  a  prominent 
early  English  Anabaptist  leader ;  as  it  furnishes  us  with  informa- 
tion about  a  printed  work  of  Leonard  Rusher's  which  up  to  this 
time  seems  to  have  remained  entirely  unknown ;  and,  finally, 
as  it  is  among  the  earliest  manuscripts  of  the  English  General 
^  Interlined  by  Toppe. 


280  Early  English  Dissenters 

Anabaptists  still  preserved.  Where  Toppe  was  when  he  pre- 
pared this  document  does  not  appear,  but  I  presume  he  was 
at  Tiverton. 

Busher's  name  as  given  in  the  two  manuscripts  mentioned 
above,  viz.,  "  Mark  Leonard  Busher  "  and  "  Mr.  mark,  Leonard 
Busher",  is  certainly  remarkable,  but  from  Toppe's  writing  it  is 
manifest  that  "  mark  "  is  to  be  separated  from  Busher's  ordinary 
name,  and  I  surmise  that  some  time  after  his  conversion  to  Ana- 
baptism,  following  in  a  manner  the  example  of  the  Apostle  Paul, 
he  may  have  given  himself  this  new  (New  Testament)  name. 
By  so  doing  Busher  may  have  thought  he  could  the  better 
conform  his  life  to  the  Biblical  pattern.  The  fact  that  he  was 
still  in  Holland  suggests  that  he  may  never  have  returned  to 
England,  but  his  controversy  with  Toppe  shows  that  he  had 
not  forgotten  his  native  tongue.  Had  he  been  a  stronger  and  a 
younger  man,  he  would  certainly  have  fought  in  the  Civil  Wars 
for  the  Liberty  of  Conscience  he  had  long  before  advocated. 

As  has  already  been  indicated,  the  letters  in  the  Mennonite 
Archives  make  it  evident  that  the  English  Arminian,  or 
General,  Anabaptists  after  the  death  of  Murton  unsuccessfully 
sought  for  at  least  five  or  six  years  to  be  united  with  the 
Dutch  Waterlanders.  Apparently  attempts  at  such  a  complete 
union  failed  even  after  1630,  but  it  is  also  probable  that  during 
the  Primacy  of  Dr  William  Laud  many  of  the  English  Ana- 
baptists were  suppressed,  or  compelled  to  flee  out  of  England 
for  safety.  As  such  single  persons  emigrated  to  Holland,  they 
undoubtedly  applied  individually  for  membership  in  the  English- 
Dutch  congregation  at  Amsterdam.  Hence  we  find  that  on 
September  26,  1630,  one  Janneker  (Jane)  Morton  was  admitted 
to  membership  without  further  baptism,  on  the  ground  that  she 
had  formerly  been  baptized  by  Mr  Smith  (Smyth)\  This  was 
certainly  the  wife  of  John  Murton,  and  her  application  to  the 
Waterlanders  suggests  the  possibility  of  a  temporary  effacement 
<i{  the  English  General  Anabaptists  in  London,  and  a  gradual 
reunion  of  the  Smyth  and  the  Helwys  parties  in  the  fold  of 
the  Dutch  Mennonites. 

1  Dr  B.  Evans'  "The  Early  English  Baptists",  Vol.  i.,  London,  1862, 
p.  222. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  RISE  OF  THE  INDEPENDENTS 

The  rise  of  the  Independents,  or  Congregational  Puritans, 
has  been  much  misunderstood.  Scholars  have  generally  thought 
of  them  as  a  direct  outgrowth  of  Brownism  or  Barrowism,  and 
have  even  confused  them  with  separatists.  It  is  gradually 
becoming  more  and  more  clear,  however,  that  the  early  Inde- 
pendents, or  early  Congregationalists,  were  merely  a  certain 
type  of  Puritans,  and  not  separatists  from  the  Church  of 
England,  also  that  the  Independents  did  not  directly  obtain 
their  opinions  from  either  Brownists  or  Ban-owists.  Besides 
this  confusion  in  the  past  which  has  obscured  the  history  of 
the  early  Independents,  the  dearth  of  material  relating  to  them 
has  rendered  it  an  unusually  difficult  task  accurately  to  trace 
their  beginnings.  However,  with  the  help  of  the  first  volume 
of  Boswell  Papers  preserved  in  the  British  Museum,  which  was 
only  casually  used  by  Dr  John  Waddington^  and  was  apparently 
unknown  to  Dr  Dexter,  and  also  with  the  aid  of  certain  other 
little  known  manuscripts,  the  origin  of  early  Independency  may 
now  be  made  much  more  plain  than  heretofore. 

We  may  begin  our  investigations  with  the  career  of  Henry 
Jacob,  under  whose  direct  influence  the  early  Independents,  or 
Congregational  Puritans  seem  to  have  originated.     As  is  well 

1  See  his  "Congregational  History",  1567-1700,  1874,  pp.  287-305. 
Dr  Waddington  does  not  style  these  papers  the  Boswell  Papers,  though 
he  mentions  Boswell's  name  once  or  twice,  and  it  was  only  about  the 
beginning  of  1909  that  I  became  aware  of  the  fact  that  he  had  used  them 
at  all.  Dr  Waddington's  careless  manner  of  indicating  his  sources  is 
particularly  aggravating  in  an  instance  like  this. 


282  Early  English  Dissenters 

known,  Jacob  first  appears  as  a  public  figure  about  1596 
when  he  had  "some  speach  with  certen  of  the  separation", 
i.e.,  Barrowists,  "concerning  their  peremptory  &  vtter  separation 
from  the  Churches  of  England  ",  and  "  was  requested  by  them  " 
to  give  the  reason  for  his  defence  of  the  State  Church.  If  he 
would  comply  with  their  wish,  they  said,  they  would  then 
secure  a  satisfactory  answer  to  his  argument,  or  renounce  their 
separation.  Accordingly  Jacob  gave  them  a  brief  note  of  his 
reasons  which  was  sent  to  Francis  Johnson  then  in  the  Clink 
prison  in  Southwark.  Johnson  replied  and  Jacob  gave  his 
answer.  Johnson  again  took  up  the  argument,  and  Jacob  once 
more  replied^  Finally,  in  1599,  this  correspondence  was  pub- 
lished by  "  D.  B."  at  Middelburg  in  a  quarto  volume  bearing 
the  title,  "A  Defence  of  the  Chvrches  and  Ministery  of 
Englande."  The  purpose  of  its  publication  was  to  prevent 
various  English  Puritans  at  Middelburg,  and  elsewhere  in  the 
Low  Countries,  from  falling  into  separatism.  In  manuscript 
form  it  had  already  had  satisfactory  results  in  this  direction. 
The  initials  of  the  publisher,  "  D.  B."  were  erroneously  taken  to 
stand  for  Doctor  (Richard)  Bancroft. 

In  1600  Francis  Johnson  published  a  book  entitled,  "An 
Answer  to  Maister  H.  lacob  his  Defence  of  the  Churches  and 
Ministery  of  England ".  In  this  he  gives  an  illuminating 
passage  concerning  the  publisher  of  Jacob's  work,  in  which  he 
shows  that  the  initials  "  D.  B,"  do  not  stand  for  Doctor  Bancroft, 
but   for  his  own  former  co-sectary,  Daniel  Bucke'^,  who   had 

1  [Henry  Jacob's]  "A  Defence  of  the  Chvrches",  Middelbvrgh,  1599, 
p.  3. 

2  It  will  be  remembered  that  Bucke's  deposition  on  March  9,  1592/93, 
gave  very  extended  information  concerning  the  Barrowist  meetings  and 
church  officers.  He  was  at  this  time  a  loyal  separatist,  and  had  been 
present  at  the  organization  of  the  congregation  in  September,  1592.  Subse- 
quently, however,  he  had  changed  his  opinions,  and  we  may  now  see  what 
Johnson  has  to  say  about  Bucke's  later  history  : — 

"These  two  letters,  D.  B.  I  fynd  to  be  set  for  Doctor  Bancroft  of  Lon- 
don in  a  *  shameles  book  of  his  [From  margin.  "Geuev.  (Genev.  ?)  Scot.  (?) 
&  AUobrog.  Disc.  Pag.  7."],  not  long  synce  sparsed  abroad.  In  which 
respect,  as  also  considering  many  as  godles  things  here  agayne  published, 
albeit  some  might  think  it  were  therefore  to  be  ascribed  vnto  him,  yet 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  283 

left  the  Barrowists,  and  evidently  had  now  connected  himself 
with  the  Puritan  congregation  of  the  English  Merchant  Ad- 
venturers in  Middelburg,  of  which  Johnson  had  formerly  been 
pastor. 

What  effect  this  controversy  with  Johnson  had  on  Jacob 
is  only  indirectly  indicated.  It  certainly  did  not  convert 
him  to  separatism,  but  it  may  have  made  him  a  little  more 
conscious  of  the  defects  in  the  Established  Church,  and  the 
more  ready  thereafter  to  take  an  advanced  Puritan,  non- 
separatist,  position.  As  is  well  known,  Jacob  appears'  in 
1603,  as  one  of  the  Puritan  leaders  who  drew  up  a  so-called 
Millenary  Petition  which  was  presented  to  King  James  I  on  his 
accession  to  the  throne.     Fortunately  several  of  Jacob's  papers' 

for  other  causes  partly  appearing  in  the  book,  partly  knowen  of  the  man, 
I  thinck  this  Preface  [to  Henry  Jacob's  "A  Defence",  1599]  was  not 
made  by  him:  but  rather  by  another  "B.B.  [From  margin:  "Daniel 
Buck  "]  a  Scrivener  of  London,  a  man  that  hath  turned  his  coat  and  for- 
saken the  truth,  as  often  as  tD.  P.  [From  margin:  "tDoct.  Perne"]  the 
old  turncoat  did,  if  not  also  oftener.  He  it  was,  that  by  letters  desired  of 
me,  to  aunswer  Mr  lacobs  Argument,  as  here  is  said  :  being  himself  at 
that  tyme  separated  from  the  false  worship  and  Ministery  of  England, 
to  which  vomit  he  is  now  againe  returned,  wallowing  in  that  myer  from 
which  then  he  was  washed.  Then  also  he  could  say,  himself  thought 
Mr.  lacobs  Argument  was  frivolous  and  of  no  waight,  and  that  his  desier 
with  some  others  was  to  have  it  aunswered  for  the  stopping  of  Mr  lacobs 
mouth,  who  thought  it  vnaunswerable "  (Francis  lohnson's  "An  Answer 
to  Maister  H.  lacob  his  Defence  of  the  Churches  and  Ministery  of 
England",  1600,  4°,  Preface  [p.  v]). 

1  There  is  among  the  manuscripts  preserved  at  Hatfield  House, 
Hertfordshire  (Press-mark  72.24.),  a  letter  of  W.  Cholmley  to  Edward 
Reynolds  of  the  date,  August  4,  1599,  in  which  the  following  sentence 
occurs  :  "  My  Lord  has  bestowed  on  me  the  office  in  the  Tower  [of  London] 
which  Henry  Jacob  lately  held."  See  the  Reports  of  the  Historical 
Manuscripts  Commission,  Part  ix.,  London,  1902,  p.  27.  Could  this  refer 
to  our  Henry  Jacob,  or  to  any  Henry  Jacob  closely  related  to  him  ? 

2  MS.  113,  fol.  242-53.  The  most  important  portions  are  given  in 
full  in  the  volume  of  documents.  These  papers  furnish  various  facts 
concerning  Jacob's  life  which  have  hitherto  been  little  known  in  spite 
of  the  probability  that  Dr  John  Waddingtou  saw  these  same  papers  in 
his  earlier  years,  when,  however,  he  made  very  poor  use  of  the  valuable 
material  therein  contained.  Strange  to  say,  he  appears  either  not  to 
have  realized  their  value,  or  only  to  have  glanced  through  them  hastily,  so 


284  Early  English  Dissenters 

of  the  period  1603-5  have  been  preserved  in  Lambeth  Palace 
Library  where  the  author  rediscovered  them  early  in  1905. 

From  these  papers  it  would  appear  that  about  the  end  of 
July,  1604,  Jacob  published  his  work  entitled,  "  Reasons  taken 
ovt  of  Gods  Word  and  the  best  hvmane  Testimonies  proving 
a  necessitie  of  reforming  ovr  Chvrches  in  England."  The 
Bishop  of  London  on  hearing  of  the  publication  of  the  book 
sent  a  messenger,  requesting  Jacob  to  come  to  speak  with  him. 
A  servant  reported  the  message  to  Jacob,  and  he,  not  knowing, 
but  possibly  suspecting,  the  object  of  this  invitation,  called 
upon  the  Bishop,  and  was  immediately  made  a  prisoner  and 
committed  to  the  Clinks  After  a  time,  as  his  imprisonment 
continued,  Jacob's  wife  and  four  small  children  found  themselves 
in  much  distress.  He  accordingly  sent  a  request  for  his  release, 
and  explained  that  the  publication  of  his  book  was  really  a 
very  reasonable  proceeding.  In  his  conduct  Jacob  showed 
himself  to  be  an  entirely  different  type  of  person  from  Robert 
Browne,  Henry  Barrowe,  and  John  Greenwood,  all  of  whom 
were  much  more  outspoken  than  he.  They  did  not  intend  to 
show  any  respect  to  high  clerical  dignitaries.  Jacob,  on  the 
contrary,  was  more  politic,  and  well  understood  how  to  bear 

that  later  when  he  wrote  his  extended  history,  he  made  little  better  use  of 
them,  and  failed  to  state  where  they  were  to  be  found.  The  way  in  which 
he  neglected  these  papers  is  all  the  more  unaccountable,  when  one  realizes 
that  in  the  same  volume  which  contains  them  are  the  two  most  extended 
manuscripts  of  Robert  Browne's  still  extant.  How  Dr  Dexter  happened 
to  miss  this  material  is  equally  astonishing,  for  either  he,  or  someone 
working  for  him,  had  certainly  seen  the  contents  of  this  volume  as  some- 
what incorrectly  described  in  the  catalogue  of  the  Lambeth  Palace  MSS., 
and  as  I  have  recently  discovered,  has  even  inserted  in  his  Bibliography 
the  following  entry,  "  [1590.]  [T.  Cartwright.] — A  Reproof  of  Certain 
Schismaticall  persons,  and  their  Doctrine  concerning  the  Hearing  and 
Preaching  of  the  Word  of  God.  fol.  32.  [MS.]  "  !  He  seems,  however,  to 
have  sought  to  reproduce  the  original  spelling  of  the  title  without  con- 
sulting the  manuscript  itself ! 

The  greater  part  of  the  Jacob  papers  was  first  published  by  the  author 
in  "The  Review  and  Expositor"  (Louisville,  Kentucky)  for  October,  1907, 
pp.  489-513,  under  the  title,  "Lost  Prison  Papers  of  Henry  Jacob". 

*  A  citation  by  Dr  R.  W.  Dale  ("  History  of  English  Congregationalism  ", 
London,  1907,  p.  215)  suggests  that  this  was  not  the  first  time  that  Jacob 
was  imprisoned. 


The  Rise  of  the  I7ide2)endents  285 

himself  in  the  presence  of  superior  ecclesiastics,  so  that  their 
displeasure  would  be  somewhat  mollified  by  his  conciliatory 
manner  of  speech  and  shrewd  argument. 

Not  even  his  adroit  pleading,  however,  availed  at  once  to 
move  the  Bishop  of  London  to  a  display  of  leniency,  though  it 
should  be  said  that  Jacob's  previously  mentioned  request  for 
release  may  not  have  been  written  very  long  before  he  was 
allowed  to  make  a  subscription  to  three  articles.  After  this  had 
been  signed,  as  he  intimates  in  another  place,  during  a  private 
interview  with  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  on  April  4,  1605, 
he  was  released  on  bail  for  half  a  year.  It  appears  that  Jacob 
kept  a  copy  of  the  text  of  this  document,  in  order  thereby,  no 
doubt,  in  case  of  necessity,  to  refresh  his  remembrance,  or  to 
justify  himself.  To  his  private  text  he  added  various  reserva- 
tions and  explanations,  and  says,  "  Whosoever  do  make  any 
other  sense  of  my  words  they  do  me  wrong.  [Space.]  Henry 
lacob."  This  subscription  strikingly  reminds  one  of  Robert 
Browne's  signed  in  1585,  and  of  which  the  original  manuscript 
apparently  no  longer  exists.  Jacob's  subscription  is  therefore 
of  unusual  interest,  as  it  not  only  gives  us  knowledge  of  a  long- 
forgotten  event,  but  also  makes  his  personality  much  more  real. 
Like  Browne  he  evidently  felt  quite  justified  in  giving  his  own 
private  interpretation  to  the  text  he  was  to  subscribe,  and  in 
signing  it  with  that  interpretation  in  mind.  In  fact,  this  seems 
to  have  been  the  only  way  of  dealing  with  the  bishops  of  that 
day,  unless  one  wished  to  pass  one's  life  in  some  dreary  prison. 

"  A  third  humble  Supplication  "  of  the  Puritans  addressed 
to  the  King  in  1605,  and  corrected  by  Jacobs  is  to  be  found 
among  his  papers.  In  this  is  a  passage  which  well  illustrates 
the  aims  of  the  Puritans  of  that  time.  They  request  toleration, 
and  permission — 

1  This  document  is  not  that  which  Dr  John  Waddington  in  his  ac- 
count of  Jacob  ("Congregational  History",  1567-1700,  1874,  pp.  174-76) 
mentions  as  being  written  by  Jacob  and  annotated  in  King  James  I's 
own  handwriting,  for  this  was  not  originally  written  by  Jacob,  and  there 
are  no  marginal  annotations  by  the  king.  Jacob  himself  corrected  this 
document.  The  MS.  to  which  Waddington  here  refers  was  described, 
I  believe,  during  the  past  year  (1910)  in  "Blackwood's  Magazine",  as  an 
hitherto  unnoticed  Puritan  document ! 


286  Early  English  Dissenter's 

to  Assemble  togeather  somwhere  publikly  to  the  Service  &  Worship 
of  God,  to  vse  &  enioye  peaceably  among  our  selves  alone  the  wholl 
exercyse  of  Gods  worship  and  of  Church  Government  viz.  by  a 
Pastor,  Elder,  &  Deacons  in  our  [?]  sevei-all  Assemblie[s]  without 
any  tradicion  of  men  whatsoeuer,  according  only  to  the  specification 
of  Gods  written  word  and  no  otherwise,  which  hitherto  as  yet  in  this 
our  present  State  we  could  never  enjoye. 

Provided  alwayes,  that  whosoeuer  will  enter  into  this  way,  shall 

1  before  a  lustice  of  peace  first  take  the  oath  of  your  Maiesties 
supremacy  &  royall  authority  as  the  Lawes  of  the  Land  at  this 

2  present  do  set  forth  the  same ;  And  shall  also  afterwards  keepe 
brotherly  communion  with  the  rest  of  our  English  Churches  as  they 
are  now  established,  according  as  the  French  and  Dutch  Churches 

3  do  ;  And  shall  truly  pay  all  paymentes  and  dutyes  both  ecclesi- 
asticall  and  civill,  as  at  this  present  they  stand  bound  to  pay  in 

4  anie  respect  whatsoever  ;  And  if  anie  trespas  be  committed  by  anie 
of  them  whether  Ecclesiastically  or  Civilly  against  good  order  and 
Christian  obedience;  That  then  the  same  person  shalbe  dealt  withall 
therein  by  anie  of  your  Maiestes  Ciuill  Magistrates,  and  by  the  same 
Ecclesiasticall  government  only  wherevnto  he  ordinarily  ioyneth  him 
self,  according  as  to  lustice  apperteyneth,  and  not  to  be  molested 
by  anie  other  whomsoever. 

This  passage  sums  up  what  the  Puritans  of  Jacob's  type 
were  seeking.  In  brief,  they  desire  in  their  congregations  a 
Pastor,  Elder,  and  Deacons,  and  do  not  wish  to  be  compelled  to 
follow  any  human  traditions.  They  are  willing  to  take  the  Oath 
of  Supremacy,  to  remain  in  "  brotherly  communion  "  with  the 
Church  of  England,  to  pay  all  dues  ecclesiastical  and  civil,  and  in 
case  of  any  offence  being  committed  by  any  of  them,  to  be  tried 
before  any  civil  magistrate  and  also,  evidently,  by  the  governing 
body  of  the  congregation  to  which  they  individually  belong. 

Certain  opinions  of  Jacob's  contained  in  a  paper  entitled, 

"  Principles  &  Foundations  of  Christian  Religion  ",  the  entire 

text  of  which  may  be  found  in  the  volume  of  documents,  show 

how  far  he  had  advanced  in  his  Puritan,  non-separatist,  views 

before    he    left   England    in  1605.     Here,  for  instance,  is  his 

definition  of  a  true  visible  church : — 

A  true  Visible  or  Ministerial!  Church  of  Christ  is  a  particular  Con- 
gregation being  a  spirituall  perfect  Corporation  of  Believers,  & 
having  power  in  its  selfe  immediatly  from  Christ  to  administer  all 
Religious  meanes  of  faith  to  the  members  thereof. 

As  to  the  question  of  how  such  a  true  church  is  to  be 
"constituted  &  gathered",  i.e.,  organized,  he  says: — 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  287 

By  a  free  mutuall  [From  margin:  "Math.  18.  19,  20."]  consent  of 
Believers  joyning  k  covenanting  to  live  as  Members  of  a  holy 
Society  togeather  in  all  religious  »k  vertuous  duties  as  Christ  k  his 
Apostles  did  institute  &  practise  in  the  Gospell.  By  such  a  free 
mutuall  consent  also  all  Civill  perfect  Corporations  did  first  beginne. 

As  to  church  officers,  he  says  they  should  be  "  A  Pastor  or 
Bishop,  with  Elders,  &  Deacons  "^ 

From  one  of  these  citations  we  see  that  Jacob  already 
advocated  the  employment  of  covenants  among  the  Puritans, 
being  thus  early  well  advanced  in  his  views  as  an  Independent, 
or  Congregational,  non-separatist,  Puritan,  who  believed  that 
each  congregation  in  the  Church  of  England  was  sufficient  to 
determine  its  own  policy  and  manage  its  own  affairs  without  the 
necessity  of  assistance  from  Archbishops  and  Bishops,  or  even 
from  Classes,  Synods,  etc.  It  should  especially  be  noticed  that 
Jacob  was  not  a  separatist  at  this  time,  and  he  never  became  one. 
It  is  thus  made  evident  that  Puritans  were  already  advocating 
views  which  hitherto  have  been  ascribed  only  to  the  genius  of 
separatists. 

One  of  the  first  apparently  to  agree  with,  and  to  promulgate, 
the  congregational  Puritan  views  of  Henry  Jacob  was  William 
Bradshaw  (1571-1618)'.  In  1605  he  stated  these  views  with 
great  clearness  in  an  anonymous  pamphlet,  which,  however, 
is  well  understood  to  have  been  written  by  him,  entitled, 
"ENGLISH  PVRITANI8ME  \  CONTAINE-|iV^/i\^G^.  |  The 
maine  opinions  of  the  rigidest  |  sort  of  those  that  are  called 
Puritanes  \  In  the  Realme  of  England.  |  . . .  |  Printed  1605  ",  8", 
pp.  ii,  35.  This  title  suggests  that  there  was  at  that  time  more 
than  one  type  of  Puritan,  and  it  seems  possible  after  1605, 
therefore,  to  separate  the  Puritans  into  two  general  divisions. 
First,  there  were  those  of  the  older  Presbyterian  non-separatist 
type,  and  secondly,  after  1605,  also  those  of  the  later  "Jacobite", 
Bradshawian,  Congregational,  or  Independent  non-separatist 
type.     Bradshaw's  pamphlet  is  illuminating  from  an  historical 

'  In  one  of  his  books  published  some  years  later,  as  is  noticed  here- 
after, he  speaks  of  the  proper  church  officers  as  "Pastors,  Teachers, 
Elders,  and  Deacons". 

^  For  Bradshaw's  life  see  the  excellent  account  of  hira  in  the  "Dictionary 
of  National  Biography." 


288  Early  English  Dissenters 

standpoint  and  should  be  read  throughout.  Here  are  a  few 
specially  pertinent  passages^ : — 

1  J  I  ']HEY  [the  "  rigidest  sort"  of  Puritans]  hould  and  maintaine 

I  that  euery  Gompanie,  Congregation  or  Assemhlie  of  men, 
ordinarilie  ioyneing  together  in  the  true  worship  of  God,  is  a  true 
visible  church  of  Ghrist.  and  that  the  same  title  is  improperlie 
attributed  to  any  other  Conuocations,  Synods  Societies,  combinations, 
or  assemblies  whatsoeuer. 

2  They  hould  that  all  such  Ghurches  or  Congregations,  communi- 
cating after  that  manner  together,  in  diuine  worship  are  in  all 
Ecclesiasticall  matters  cquall  [equall],  and  of  the  same  pov)er  and 
autJioritie,  and  that  by  the  word  and  tvill  of  God  they  ought  to  Jiaue 
the  same  spirituall  jjriuilidges,  prerogatius,  officers,  administrations, 
orders,  and  Formes  of  divine  worship. 

3  They  hould  that  Christ  lesus  hath  not  subiected  any  Church  or 
Congregation  of  his,  to  any  other  superior  Ecclesiasticall  Jurisdiction, 
then  vnto  that  which  is  within  it  self  So  that  yf  a  wholl  Churche  or 
Congregation  shall  erre,  in  any  matters  of  faith  or  religion,  noe  other 
Churches  or  Spirituall  Church  officers  haue  (by  any  warrant  from  the 
word  of  God)  power  to  censure,  jninish,  or  controtde  the  same :  but  are 
onely  to  counsell  and  aduise  the  same,  and  so  to  leaue  their  Soules  to 
the  immediate  Judgment  of  Christ,  and  their  bodies  to  the  sword  & 
power  of  the  Ciuill  Magistral,  who  alone  vpon  Earth  hath  power  to 
punish  a  whol  Church  or  Congregation. 

In  Bradshaw's  exaltation  of  the  civil  magistrate  to  the 
position  of  chief  arbiter  in  all  ecclesiastical  matters  we  see 
how  the  Congregational  Puritans  were  planning  to  deal  with 
the  practical  problem  of  abolishing  the  offices  of  Archbishop, 
Bishop,  etc.,  how  they  would  at  the  same  time  preserve  the 
Church  of  England  intact  as  a  National  Church,  and  how  they 
would  prevent  the  actual  establishment  of  universal  separatism 
in  England,  should  their  ideal  be  realized. 

I  have  not  yet  noticed  that  Bradshaw  mentions  the  use  of 
covenants.  He  is,  however,  emphasizing  the  external  rather 
than  the  internal  policy  of  Puritan  non-separatist,  Congre- 
gationalism. Hence  his  failure  here  to  endorse  the  use  of 
covenants  does  not  by  any  means  indicate  that  he  would  not 
advocate  their  employment.  The  drawing  up  of  covenants 
by  Congregational  Puritans  may  not  have  been  a  frequent 
occurrence  in  England  before  1641,  but  the  practice  certainly 

»  Pp.  5-6. 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  289 

increased    as   this   type   of    Puritans   became   more   common. 

John  Robinson,  for  instance,  was  a  Puritan  of  this  kind  and 

engaged    in    covenant   with    other   Puritan   members   of    the 

Church  of  England  before  he  became  a  separatist,  for  he  says': — 

We  do  with  all  thankfulnes  to  our  God  acknowledg,  and  with 
much  comfort  remember  those  lively  feelings  of  Gods  love,  &  former 
graces  wrought  in  vs,  &  that  one  special  grace  amongst  the  rest 
by  which  we  have  been  enabled  to  drawe  our  selves  into  visible 
Covenant,  and  holy  communion.  Yea  with  such  comfort  and 
assurance  do  we  call  to  mynde  the  Lords  work  this  way  in  vs,  as 
we  doubt  not  but  our  salvation  was  sealed  vp  vnto  our  consciences 
by  most  infallible  marks  and  testimonyes  (which  could  not  deceave) 
before  we  conceaved  the  least  thought  of  separation ;  and  so  we 
hope  it  is  with  many  others  in  the  Church  of  Engl,  [and]  yea  and  of 
Rome  too. 

The  employment  of  covenants  may  occasionally  have  been 

adopted  by  Puritans  for  some  special  reason.     At  any  rate,  it  is 

well  known  that  Richard  Bernard  in  1607,  in  order  to  counteract 

the  influence  of  John  Smyth,  drew  up  a  covenant  with  one 

hundred   people   in   his   parish    at    Worksop.      This   event   is 

described  as  follows  by  Robinson^: — 

Once  you  know  Mr  B.[ernard]  you  did  separate  from  the  rest 
an  hundred  voluntary  professors  into  covenant  with  the  Lord,  sealed 
vp  with  the  Lords  supper,  to  forsake  all  knowne  sinn,  to  hear  no 
wicked  or  dumb  Ministers,  and  the  like,  which  covenant  long  since 
you  have  dissolved,  not  shaming  to  affirme  you  did  it  onely  in  policy 
to  keepe  your  people  from  Mr  Smyth 

This  covenant  engagement  was  evidently  broken  off  when 
Smyth  left  England, — a  fact  which  probably  indicates  that 
Bernard  did  not  continue  to  maintain  a  Congregational  Puritan 
position. 

At  a  still  later  period,  but  some  time  before  1632,  John 
Cotton,  while  at  Boston  in  Lincolnshire,  and  holding  office  in 
the  Church  of  England,  "entred  into  a  Covenant  with  the 
Lord  ",  "  with  some  scores  of  godly  persons  ",  "  to  follow  after 
the  Lord  in  the  purity  of  his  worship;  which  though  it  was 
defective,  yet  it  was  more  then  the  Old  Non-conformity "^  or 
early  Puritanism. 

1  "^  Ivstification  oi  Separation'',  1610,  p.  60.  -  Ibid.,  p.  94. 

3  John   Cotton's   "The  Way   of  Congregational   Churches   Cleared", 
London,  1648,  p.  20. 

B.  19 


290  Early  English  Dissenters 

As  has  already  been  stated,  Congregational  Puritans  who 
engaged  in  covenant  were  certainly  not  numerous  in  England 
before  1641,  and  even  as  late  as  1648,  when  Governor  Bradford 
refers  to  them  in  "  A  Dialogue,  or  the  Sum  of  a  Conference  ", 
he  merely  says:  "  there  are  some  parish  assemblies  [in  England] 
that  are  true  churches  by  virtue  of  an  implicit  covenant  amongst 
themselves,  in  which  regard  the  Church  of  England  may  be 
held  and  called  a  true  church."^ 

Thus  far  no  reference  has  been  made  to  John  Robinson 
after  his  arrival  in  Holland,  and  as  so  much  has  already  been 
written  about  him  by  others,  only  a  few  points  relating  to 
this  part  of  his  career  will  here  be  mentioned.  As  was 
pointed  out  in  "The  Christian  Life"  about  five  years  ago^ 
practically  nothing  was  then  known  concerning  the  early  life  of 
Robinson.  In  an  attempt  to  remedy  this  deficiency  I  have 
recently  (1910)  published  "A  Tercentenary  Memorial  New 
Facts  concerning  John  Robinson  Pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers"^ 
In  addition  to  what  is  said  there,  it  might  now  be  suggested 
that  up  to  the  present  time  even  his  more  public  career  in 
Holland  has  been  much  misunderstood.  The  Continental  life 
of  Robinson  can  best  be  studied  in  connection  with  that  of 
Henry  Jacob  and  William  Bradshaw.  The  former  came  to 
Middelburg  apparently  some  time  about  the  summer  of  1605, 
and  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  became  the  minister  of  the  con- 
gregation of  the  English  Merchant  Adventurers  in  that  city, 
over  whom  Johnson  had  ministered  fifteen  years  or  so  before. 
We  know  that  already  in  1605  Jacob  had  well-defined  Inde- 
pendent, or  Congregational,  Puritan  (non-separatist)  views  as 
to  church  polity,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  as  soon 
as  possible  he  endeavoured  to  put  these  ideas  into  practice  in 
this  Continental  church.  Jacob  probably  was  well  established 
in  his  position  when  Richard  Clyfton  and  John  Robinson,  then 
a  rigid  separatist,  arrived  in  Amsterdam  about  1608, 

1  See  Alexander  Young's  "Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  the 
Colony  of  Plymouth,  from  1602  to  1625...",  Boston,  1841,  8°,  p.  416. 

2  In  a  review  of  the  late  Rev.  Morton  Dexter's  "The  England  and 
Holland  of  the  Pilgrims",  1906. 

3  Oxford  and  London. 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  291 

In  1609  Robinson  and  about  one  hundred  of  the  original 
Scrooby  company  removed  to  Leyden,  and  in  this  year,  I  believe, 
as  has  been  expressed  in  "A  Tercentenary  Memorial ",  he  became 
for  the  first  time  pastor  of  the  church.  According  to  the  hitherto 
usually  accepted  traditional  view  Robinson  met  Jacob  in  1610 
and  converted  him  to  the  ways  of  Independency.  How  baseless 
this  tradition  really  is,  though  accepted  by  historians  like 
Dr  Dexter  and  others,  will  soon  appear.  In  the  first  place,  in 
1610  John  Robinson  was  not  an  Independent  but  a  separatist, 
and  in  the  same  year  he  wrote  his  well-known  work,  entitled, 
"A  I  IVSTIFICATION  1  OF  |  SEPARATION  from  the 
Church  of  |  England  ",  which  teaches  a  doctrine  that  the  early 
Independents  never  held.  In  the  second  place,  as  we  have 
already  seen  earlier  in  this  chapter,  Jacob  had  been  a  leader  in 
defining  the  opinions  of  the  Independent,  or  Congregational, 
Puritans  at  least  five  years  earlier  than  1610,  and  even  before 
he  came  to  Holland.  In  the  third  place,  the  subsequent 
history  of  the  lives  of  Jacob  and  Robinson  clearly  indicates 
that  Jacob  and  other  Puritans  who  more  or  less  agi-eed  with 
him  converted  Robinson  to  the  ways  of  Independency,  rather 
than  vice  versa.  In  the  fourth  place,  the  interviews  between 
Robinson  and  Jacob  are  not  dated  1610  in  the  earliest  record 
we  have  of  them. 

A  brief  account  of  how  the  traditional  view  arose  and  has 
been  perpetuated,  may  be  instructive. — For  this  the  so-called 
Jessey  Records,  preferably  Memoranda,  now  transcribed  into  the 
Gould  Manuscript  (the  text  of  a  part  of  which  is  given  in  the 
volume  of  documents)  seem  to  be  primarily  responsible,  but  it 
will  be  noticed  on  a  careful  examination  of  the  text,  that  Jessey 
does  not  actually  say  that  Jacob  derived  his  opinions  from  Robin- 
son, though  such  an  impression  might  perhaps  be  made  on  the 
casual  reader.    The  Memoranda  read  on  this  point  as  follows : — 

He  [Jacob]  having  had  much  conference  about  these  things 
here  [in  England] ;  after  that  in  the  low  Countries  he  had  converse 
&  discoursed  much  with  Mr  John  Robinson  late  Pastor  to  the 
Church  in  Leyden  &  with  others  about  them:... 

The  item  is  itself  undated,  but  occurs  between  minutes 
dated  respectively  1610  and  1616. 

19—2 


292  Early  English  Dissenters 

As  is  well  known,  the  Rev.  Daniel  Neal  was  the  first  to  use 
Benjamin  Stinton's  manuscripts,  from  one  of  which  these  words 
were  copied  into  our  present  source,  the  Gould  transcript. 
Neal  decided  that  this  passage  meant  that  Jacob  procured  his 
views  from  Robinson — an  interpretation  which  other  evidence 
now  appears  to  prove  to  be  just  the  opposite  of  the  truth,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  Neal's  opinion  has  been  perpetuated 
to  the  present  day  by  an  unbroken  line  of  unsuspecting 
scholars. 

Governor  Bradford,  who  wrote  about  the  same  time  that 
the  sources  used  by  Stinton  were  originally  written,  does  not 
make  any  such  claim  for  the  influence  of  Robinson  over  Jacob. 
On  the  contrary  Bradford  merely  mentions  the  fact  that  "some" 
of  Robinson's  congregation  (probably  Robinson,  Brewster,  Brad- 
ford, and  perhaps  others)  "  knew  Mr.  Parker,  Doctor  Ames,  and 
Mr.  Jacob  in  Holland,  when  they  sojourned  for  a  time  in 
Leyden ;  and  all  three  boarded  together  and  had  their  victuals 
dressed  by  some  of  our  acquaintance,  and  then  they  lived  com- 
fortable, and  then  they  were  provided  for  as  became  their 
persons  "\ 

The  reconstructed  statement  of  the  relationship  in  Holland 
between  Jacob  and  Robinson,  it  would  seem,  ought  to  be 
somewhat  as  follows. — Robinson  was  a  separatist,  not  an  In- 
dependent, in  1610,  and  he  published  in  that  year  his  book 
already  referred  to  justifying  separation  from  the  Church  of 
England.  In  the  same  year  Jacob  brought  out  a  work  of 
considerably  different  import,  in  which  he  continued  to  advocate 
the  congregational  Puritan  principles  which  he  had  championed 
in  1604.  His  treatise  published  at  Leyden  in  1610  is  entitled, 
"THE  I  Divine  Beginning  |  and  Institution  of  Christs  true  | 
Visible  or  Ministeriall  |  Church.  |  ..."  The  appearance  of 
these  publications  may  naturally  have  led  to  conference  on 
the  subject  of  separation,  when  the  Independent  Puritans, 
Parker,   Dr   Ames,    and    Jacob    were   in   Leyden   some   time 

^  Alexander  Young's  "  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  the  Colony 
of  Plymouth,  from  1602  to  1625",  Boston,  p.  439.  Of  course  Parker, 
Ames,  and  Jacob  did  not  maintain  exactly  the  same  views,  but  none  oj 
them  believed  in  separatism. 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  293 

between  1610  and  1616,  and  it  seems  very  reasonable  to 
believe  that  Robinson,  who  in  Leyden  was  removed  from  direct 
contact  with  the  more  aggressive  personalities  of  Johnson, 
Ainsworth,  Clyfton,  and  Smyth,  was  the  more  readily  and  the 
more  favourably  impressed  by  these  early  Independent  Puritan 
leaders.  Little  by  little  and  almost  imperceptibly,  it  would 
seem,  Robinson  now  began  to  lay  aside  his  more  rigid  separatist 
views  and  to  adopt  those  of  the  broader-minded,  non-separatist 
Independent  Puritans.  However  this  may  be,  it  is  evident  that 
by  1618^  the  pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  had  become  such  an 
Independent  Puritan. 

Not  long  before  his  death  Robinson  wrote  the  following 
words,  stating  the  position  which  he  himself  took  in  his  later 
life  in  relation  to  the  Church  of  England,  and  which  he  would 
advise  his  followers  also  to  adopt  toward  it" : — 

To  conclude,  For  my  selfe,  thus  I  beleeue  with  my  heart  before 
God,  and  professe  with  my  tongue,  and  haue  before  the  world,  that 
I  haue  one  and  the  same  faith,  hope,  spirit,  baptism,  and  Lord 
which  I  had  in  the  church  of  England  and  none  other  :  that  I 
esteem  so  many  in  that  church,  of  what  state,  or  order  soeuer,  as 
are  truly  partakers  of  that  faith  (as  I  account  many  thousand  to  be) 
for  my  christian  brethren  :  and  my  selfe  a  fellow-member  with  them 
of  that  one  misticall  body  of  Christ  seatered  [scatered]  far  and  wide 
throughout  the  world  :  that  I  haue  alwaies  in  spirit,  and  afiection 
al  christian  fellowshippe,  and  communion  with  them,  and  am  most 
ready  in  all  outward  actions,  &  exercises  of  Religione  lawfull  «fe 
lawfully  done,  to  expresse  the  same:  &  withall,  that  I  am  perswaded 
the  hearing  of  the  word  of  God  there  preached,  in  the  manner,  and 
vpon   the   grounds   formerly   mentioned,   both   lawfull,    and    vpon 


'  John  Paget  in  "An  Arrow  Against  the  Separation^',  Amsterdam, 
1618,  p.  127,  has  the  following  passage; — 

"  5.  Seing  M''.  Robinson  and  his  people  do  now  (as  divers  of  them- 
selves confesse)  receyve  the  members  of  the  Church  of  England  into 
their  congregation,  and  this  without  any  renunciation  of  the  Church  of 
England,  without  any  repentance  for  their  Idolatries  committed  in  the 
Church  of  England :  how  can  you  hold  them  to  be  a  true  Chm'ch  and 
communion  with  them  lawfull :  seing  that  by  your  reasoning  they  are 
tyed  in  the  cords  of  their  sin,  as  well  as  we;..." 

2  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of  Hearing  of  the  Ministers",  1634, 
pp.  63-4. 


294  Early  English  Dissenters 

occasion,  necessary  for  me,  &  all  true  christians,  with  drawing  from 
that  Hierarchical  order  of  church  gouernement,  and  ministery,  and 
the  appartenances  thereof:  and  vniting  in  the  order,  and  ordinances 
instituted  by  Christ,  the  onely  King,  and  Lord  of  his  Church,  and 
by  all  his  disciples  to  be  obserued  :  and  lastly,  that  I  cannot  com- 
municate with,  or  submit  vnto  the  said  [hierarchical]  Church-order, 
and  ordinances  there  established,  either  in  state,  or  act,  without 
being  condemned  of  mine  owne  heart,  and  therein  prouoking  God, 
who  is  greater  then  my  heart,  to  condemne  me  much  more.  And 
for  my  failings  (which  may  easily  be  too  many)  one  way,  or  other,  of 
ignorance  hearin,  and  so  for  all  my  other  sinnes,  I  must  humbly 
craue  pardon  first,  and  most  at  the  hands  of  God.  And  so  of 
all  men,  whom  therein  I  offend,  or  haue  offended  any  manner  of 
way :  euen  as  they  desire,  and  look  that  God  should  pardon  their 
offences. 


Little  more  needs  to  be  said  here  concerning  Robinson.  As 
is  well  known,  he  died  in  Leyden  on  March  1,  1625.  After  his 
death  the  congregation  is  said  to  have  become  so  reduced  in 
numbers  as  to  have  been  only  one  fifth  as  large  in  1634  as  it 
had  been  in  1624.  This  diminution  was  partly  due  to  the 
fact  that  some  of  the  congregation,  following  and  expanding 
Robinson's  broader  ideals,  had  "declined  or  apostated"  from 
the  church  before  1631 S  but  the  falling  off  in  membership 
seems  to  have  occurred  largely  in  1634  through  many  of  the 
members  deserting  their  comrades,  because  two  of  their  number, 
who  had  apparently  been  in  England,  had  heard  some  of  the 
clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England  preach ^  Thus  easily 
was  Robinson's  more  charitable  teaching  forgotten  and  cast  to 
the  winds.  How  long  this  breach  lasted  is  not  apparent,  but  it 
is  possible  that  some  of  the  dissatisfied  members  may  have 
gone  to  Amsterdam  to  join  the  congregation  of  John  Canne,  of 
whom,  it  is  suggested,  they  had  spoken  in  high  terms.  These 
deserters  were  evidently  of  an  extremely  narrow  spirit,  having 
even  affirmed,  as  we  are  told,  "  that  the  verie  speaking  of  a 
word  through  fraylty  about  worldly  businesses  vpon  the 
Sabbaoth  day,  should  haue  as  seuere  a  sentence,  as  he  that 


1  A.  T.'s  "A  Christian  Reprofe",  1631,  p.  20. 

2  See  John  Robinson's  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of  Hearing  of 
the  Ministers",  1634,  pp.  iii-xii. 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  295 

shall  openly  &  prophanely  transgresse  against   the  4.  Com- 
mandement,..." 

To  counteract  this  more  restricted  view  which  had  brought 
such  disaster  upon  the  church,  those  who  remained  firm  in 
Robinson's  opinions  published  in  1634  the  following  well-known 
treatise  written  by  him,  the  manuscript  of  which  was  found  in 
his  study  after  his  death,  entitled,  "A  TREATISE  |  OF  THE  | 
LAWFVLNES  |  OF  HEARING  OF  THE  |  Ministers  in  the 
church  of  England  :  . . .  " 

The  material  presented  in  the  latter  part  of  this  chapter 
has  been  largely  drawn  from  the  Boswell  Papers  ^  extended 
texts  of  a  number  of  which  have  been  given  in  the  volume  of 
documents.  It  is  sufficient  here,  therefore,  to  present  only  a 
brief  summary  of  the  chief  contents  of  these  papers. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  Puritans  of  the  older  type  were 
never  friendly  to  separatism,  the  various  English  Puritan 
churches  on  the  Continent  during  the  early  years  of  the  17th 
century  were  on  the  whole  not  a  hindrance  to,  but  rather  a 
help  in,  the  development  of  such  separatism.  This  undoubtedly 
was  chiefly  due  to  the  fact,  that  the  Puritan  ministers,  who 
went  to  Holland  in  search  of  greater  religious  freedom,  were 
not  all  of  the  old  type,  some  of  the  most  influential,  though 
apparently  differing  on  particular  points,  being  strong  advocates 
of  the  new  Puritan  Congregationalism.  Before  the  time  of 
Charles  I  and  the  Primacy  of  Archbishop  Laud,  comparatively 
few  English  preachers  seem  to  have  fled  to  Holland,  but  we  find 
a  good  number  there  in  1633. 

From  the  Boswell  Papers  we  learn  the  names  of  all  the 
cities  and  towns  in  which  the  principal  English  congregations 
in  Holland  at  this  period  were  situated,  whether  such  towns 
were  garrisoned  or  not,  and  the  names  of  all  the  ministers  of 
these  congregations  in  the  year  1633.  We  are  told  the  prin- 
cipal facts  connected  with  the  formation  and  early  history  of  the 

1  Add.  MS.  6394,  in  the  British  Museum,  on  the  binding  of  which  is 
stamped  the  words  "  Kelative  to  the  Enghsh  Church  in  the  Netherlands. 
1600-1648". 


296  Early  English  Dissenters 

English  Classis  in  the  Netherlands,  also  various  points  about 
the  Brownists  and  their  relation  to  the  Classis,  and  many 
forgotten  details  concerning  such  men  as  John  Paget,  Hugh 
Peter,  or  Peters,  Thomas  Hooker,  and  John  Davenport. 

In  1621  Mr  John  Forbes,  preacher  to  the  English  "  Mar- 
chants  adventurers"  at  Delft  first  obtained  a  commission  for 
the  English  Classis  in  the  Netherlands.  Before  that  time 
Mr  John  Paget  and  Mr  Potts  had  joined  the  Dutch  Classis  of 
Amsterdam,  but  when  this  new  Classis  was  formed,  they  were 
urged  by  its  members  to  associate  themselves  with  it.  Notice 
was  accordingly  given  to  the  Dutch  Classis,  but  its  members 
were  opposed  to  the  English  congregations  having  a  separate 
classis,  and  also  to  the  attempt  thus  made  to  draw  away 
Mr  Paget  and  Mr  Potts,  the  former  of  whom,  at  least,  appeared 
to  have  no  desire  for  such  a  change.  When  further  pressure 
was  brought  to  bear  on  Paget's  case,  the  Dutch  Synod  of 
North  Holland  confirmed  the  opinion  of  the  Amsterdam 
Classis,  and  the  "Burgomasters"  at  Amsterdam  evidently  took 
a  like  view. 

The  objections  made  to  the  English  Classis  were  the  follow- 
ing:— 

the  two  maine  reasons  why  the  English  Classis  is  condemned  are 
these  (as  they  may  be  seene  vpou  record)  1.  Because  the  Ministers 
of  England  which  come  over  hither  are  of  severall  &  inconsistent 
opinions  differing  from  one  another  &  from  all  reformed  churches, 
as  expressely  that  some  are  Brownists.  some  Brownistically  affected 
in  particular  opinions,  as  .1.  in  allowing  private  men  to  preach 
.2.  In  denijing  [?]  formes  of  praier.  3  In  admitting  Brownists  to 
their  Congregations  not  renouncing  their  Brownisme.  Some  are 
lacobites  who  require  a  New  Covenant  for  members  of  a  church  to 
make  before  they  can  be  Communicants,  2.  Condemne  the  Decisive 
&  ludging  power  of  all  Classes  &  Synods  ;  &  that  they  have  only 
a  power  of  Counsailing  &  advising,  because  every  particular  Congre- 
gation is  a  church ;  and  that  a  Compleat  church,  and  that  it  is 
Immediately  given  vnto  every  congi-egation  from  Christ  to  be 
a  single  k  vncompounded  policy;  (These  are  the  very  words 
of  M''  lacob,  tfe  Parker,  &  Baines,)  And  now  the  Dutch  Classis  & 
Synods  conclude  that  such  opinions  as  these  do  cleane  overthrow 
the  nature  of  their  goverment ;  and  that  amongst  such  diversity  of 

opinions  no  true  Classis  can  be 

2.  Because  of  the  Complaint  of  the  french  &  wallons  in  those 
countries . .  because  they  have  a  Classis  graunted   vnto   them :    It 


The  Rise  of  the  Lidependeyits  297 

were  better  (they  say  by  experience)  that  they  had  no  classis  but 
were  (as  M'  Paget  is)  mixed  into  the  Dutch  Chisses.  for  by  reason 
of  the  distan[ce  ?]  of  their  dwelling  they  cannot  have  Monthly  or 
quarterly  Meetings,  as  Classes  have,  but  only  annuall  as  Synods  : 
and  that  then  there['?]  is  such  trouble  in  their  gathering  together 
some  dwelling  in  one  province  &  some  in  another  at  such  great 
distance  that  they  were  never  all...&  by  reason  of  their  few 
meetings  the[re?]  grow  vp  many  Enormities  in  particular  congre- 
gations vnpunished  :...^ 

In  1633  Mr  Forbes  obtained  a  new  commission  for  the 
English  Classis,  and  once  more  tried  to  draw  Paget  into  it,  but 
he  continued  to  have  no  desire  to  join,  and  knowing  this,  the 
members  of  the  Dutch  Classis  promised  him  to  do  their  utmost 
to  prevent  his  removal  from  among  them. 

Evidently  before  1628  some  irregularities  were  known  to 
exist  in  the  English  Classis.  These  seem  to  have  consisted 
chiefly  in  the  use  of  new  liturgies  and  set  forms  of  prayer,  or 
of  novelties  in  ceremonies,  as  of  ordaining  ministers  without 
consulting  other  churches  in  the  Classis,  and  in  declining  to 
suppress  Brownist  or  Barrowist  preachers.  One  may  suspect 
that  Paget  had  called  the  attention  of  Sir  Dudley  Carleton, 
the  English  Ambassador,  to  this  state  of  affairs,  and  he  seems 
to  have  reported  it  to  King  Charles  I.  At  any  rate,  on  May  19, 
1628,  certain  articles  were  sent  to  the  "  Synod  of  the  English 
&  Scottish  Ministers  in  the  Netherlands,  in  the  name  of  his 
Maiestie  of  Great  Brittanie  ",  by  Sir  Dudley,  urging  the  correc- 
tion of  any  such  irregularities.  This  document  the  English  and 
Scotch  ministers  answered  in  a  very  diplomatic  manner,  entirely 
defending  their  practice,  and  asking  for  his  Majesty's  favour  in 
his  consideration  of  their  proceedings.  The  text  of  the  articles 
and  a  large  part  of  the  answer  to  them  are  given  in  the  volume 
of  documents.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  result  of  their 
appeal,  the  irregularities  still  appear  to  have  continued,  for  in 
1633  some  one,  probably  Stephen  GofFe,  wrote^: — 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  of  those  Engl:[ish]  Minister[s]  [in  the 
Netherlands]  which  vse  not  the  English  forme  [of  liturgy]  1.  Some 

1  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  146  recto,  in  the  British  Museum. 

2  Ibid.,  fol.  168. 


298  Early  English  Dissenters 

vse  the  Dutch  translated,  as  M""  Paine,  but  yet  that  mended  much 
left  out,  and  some  things  added,  as  may  appeare  by  M""  Paines 
booke.  / 

2.  Some  vse  none  at  all  as  M""  Forbes,  but  every  time  they 
administer  the  sacraments  a  new,  theyp]  doe[?]  not  stand  to  one 
of  their  owne.  / 

3.  Some  vse  another  English  forme  putt  out  at  Midleborough. 
1586.  This  M""  Goodyer  saith  he  vseth  at  Leyden.  and  M''  Peters 
saied  to  me  that  was  the  forme  he  found  in  his  consistory.  But 
whether  he  vse  it  or  no  I  cannot  tell,  I  beleive  he  goes  the 
Forbesian  way. 

4.  Some  vse  our  English  forme  in  the  sacraments  but  mangle 
them  Leaving  out  and  putting  in  whole  sentences 

Of  the  twenty-four  preachers  in  the  English  congregations 
in  the  Netherlands  in  1633^  only  Mr  Forbes,  Mr  Peters,  Mr 
Balmeford,  Mr  Paine,  Mr  Widdowes,  and  Mr  Sibbald  (a  Scotch- 
man) belonged  to  the  English  Classis.  Of  those  who  refused 
to  join  the  English  Classis,  two  were  Dutchmen,  who  spoke 
English ;  some,  including  Mr  Roe  and  Mr  Drake,  wished  to 
belong  to  no  Classis ;  three  (Mr  John  Paget,  Mr  Fortree,  and 
Mr  Gribbins)  were  of  the  Dutch  Classis ;  Mr  Goodyer  desired  to 
join  the  Leyden  Classis. 

An  extended  history  of  the  English  church  at  Utrecht  is 
given  among  the  Boswell  Papers  in  a  manuscript  written 
apparently  not  long  after  1637.  A  considerable  portion  of 
this  account  has  been  given  in  the  volume  of  documents,  so 
that  only  a  few  of  the  principal  facts  need  to  be  reproduced 
here. 

In  1622,  we  find,  Mr  Thomas  Scott  became  the  first  preacher 
of  the  English  church  in  Utrecht  then  just  organized.  At  that 
time,  Mr  Barkeley  was  the  preacher  of  the  English  congregation 
at  Rotterdam.  On  June  8, 1626,  Mr  Scott  was  murdered  while 
on  his  way  to  church,  and  on  Jan.  11, 1627,  Mr  Jeremy  Elbrough 
took  his  place. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  that  when  Mr  Scott  became  the  preacher  at 
Utrecht,  the  congregation  were  evidently  *'  bound  by  couenant 
to  pay  "  his  salary.     Possibly  in  some  such  way  as  this  church 

1  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  175,  in  the  British  Museum. 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  299 

covenants  came  little  by  little  to  be  employed  by  Puritan  con- 
gregations on  the  Continent.  In  1629  Mr  Elbrough  became 
the  minister  of  the  English  Merchants  at  Hamburg,  and  was 
succeeded  at  Utrecht  by  Dr  Alexander  Leighton,  a  Scotchman 
who  joined  the  English  Classis. 

Reference  may  be  made  in  passing  to  one  other  English 
Continental  congregation  not  mentioned  in  the  Boswell  Papers, 
namely,  that  at  Arnheim.  Of  this  church  one  Robert  Crane, 
in  a  letter  dated,  "  Vtrecht  the  16... 1640",  and  addressed  to 
his  cousin,  Sir  Robert  Crane  of  Chilton,  Suffolk,  has  given  the 
following  description^ : — 

Since  I  came  into  these  Countryes  I  haue  bin  in  a  perpetual! 
Motion,  still  rooleinge  from  Citye  to  Citye,  so  as  yet  I  could  not 
gather  any  thinge  worth. your  notice,  nor  truly  is  there  almost  any 
discourse  but  of  the  lamented  state  of  England.  I  meete  here  [in 
Holland]  with  many  sects,  but  few  Religions,  and  see  more  supers- 
tion  [superstition]  in  theire  houses  then  in  theire  Temples,  'tis 
vsuall  to  prophane  the  Churches  without  contradiction,  whilst  the 
very  ground  of  their  Chambers  is  held  as  holy ;  either  wee  must 
walke  bare=foote,  or  else  noe  admission  into  theire  Paradise,  and  if 
accidentally  wee  enter  into  a  Garden,  we  find  euery  Tree  bareth 
forbidden  fruite  ;  In  Gelderland  at  the  Citie  of  Arhnam  [Arnheim] 
I  receiued  greate  fauors  from  diuers  worthy  gentlemen  of  our 
Nation  who  haue  theire  seated  themselfs,  especially  from  these 
Sir  William  Constable,  Sir  Mathew  Boynton,  Sir  Richard  Saltingston 
of  Yorkshire,  as  also  from  Mr  Laurence  who  within  few  yeares  liued 
neere  Berrye  [Bury  St.  Edmund's],  They  haue  two  Preachers,  and 
this  the  discipline  of  theire  Church ;  Vpon  euery  Sonday  a  Com- 
munion, a  prayer  before  sermon  &  after,  the  like  in  the  aftenoone, 
The  Communion  Table  stands  in  the  lower  end  of  the  Church 
(which  hath  no  Chancell)  Altar=wise,  where  the  Cheifest  sit  &  take 
notes,  not  a  gentlewoman  that  thinkes  her  hand  to  faire  to  vse  her 
pen  &  Inke,  The  Sermon,  Prayer  and  psalme  being  ended,  the 
greatest  companie  present  theire  offeringes,  which  amounte  to  about 
two  or  3  hundred  pounds  a  yeare  Sterlinge.  the  Ministers  content 
themselfs  with  a  hundred  pounds  a  man  per  Annum  the  Remainder 
is  reserued  for  pious  vses  ;... 

The  name  of  John  Robinson  does  not  appear  at  all  in  the 
Boswell  Papers,  and  that  of  Henry  Jacob  probably  does  not 
occur  more  than  once  or   twice.     This  fact,  however,  is  not 


Tanner  MS.  65,  fol.  24,  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford. 


800  Early  English  Dissenters 

surprising  for  two  reasons, — in  the  first  place,  because  the  most 
of  the  papers  pertain  to  a  time  after  1630,  though  one  or  two 
of  them  date  back  as  far  as  1622 ;  and  in  the  second  place, 
because  Jacob  had  returned  to  England  in  1616  and  died 
in  1624,  while  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  who  formed  the  larger 
portion  of  Robinson's  congregation,  had  gone  to  America  in 
1620. 

As  we  have  already  seen,  however,  Jacob  had  left  such  an 
impression  behind  him,  that  the  Independent  Puritans  were 
evidently  for  some  years  known  as  'Jacobites '.  This  fact  is  proved 
by  a  passage,  which,  though  it  has  been  cited  in  another  connec- 
tion, may  profitably  be  repeated  here :  "  Some  are  lacobites 
who  require  a  New  Covenant  for  members  of  a  church  to  make 
before  they  can  be  Communicants,  2.  Condemne  the  Decisive 
&  Judging  power  of  all  Classes  &  Synods ;  &  that  they  have 
only  a  power  of  Counsailing  &  advising,  because  every  par- 
ticular Congregation  is  a  church ;  and  that  a  Compleat  church, 
and  that  it  is  Immediately  given  vnto  every  congregation  from 
Christ  to  be  a  single  &  vncompounded  policy;  (These  are 
the  w^ords  of  M""  lacob,  &  Parker,  &  Baines,)..."  The  reader 
will  notice  that  the  Independent  Puritans  are  not  here  called 
Robinsonians,  as  they  probably  would  have  been  if,  according  to 
tradition,  Robinson  had  taught  Jacob  the  views  of  congrega- 
tional Puritanism. 

From  the  Boswell  Papers,  as  has  already  been  indicated,  a 
good  many  facts  may  also  be  gathered  concerning  the  lives  of 
various  other  notable  Puritans.  Among  these  Hugh  Peters,  the 
Independent,  or  'Jacobite'  Puritan,  may  be  first  mentioned.  He 
seems  to  have  been  the  assistant  of  Mr  Forbes  in  the  congre- 
gation of  English  Merchants  at  Delft  in  1633,  but  he  preached 
his  farewell  sermon  there  on  the  last  Sunday  of  October  in 
that  year.  On  his  arrival  in  Rotterdam,  to  which  city  he  had 
evidently  been  called  to  take  charge  of  the  local  English  church, 
he  appears  at  once  to  have  drawn  up  the  text  of  a  very  explicit 
and  extended  covenant,  and  to  have  announced  that  no  one, 
not  even  old  members  of  the  congregation,  who  did  not  sub- 
scribe to  that  document,  should  be  admitted  to  Communion. 
At  least  one   member,  Alexander  Browne,  demurred  at  this 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  301 

action  on  the  new  pastor's  part  and  showed  his  deep  feeling 
by  writing :  "  what  authoritie  he  haith  to  doe  these  thinges : 
I  knowe  not."  Such  a  statement  seems  to  indicate  that  this 
congregation  had  never  before  employed  an  explicit  church 
covenant.  Peters,  however,  was  evidently  successful  in  de- 
manding the  signing  of  the  document,  and  the  following  vivid 
account  of  his  ordination  has  been  preserved^ : — 

Concerning  M""  Peters  ordinacion 

1.  There  was  a  New  Covenant  made  with[?]  certaine  precise  <fe 
strict  obligacions  to  which  they  should  bind  themselves,  and  he 
would  be  chosen  by  none  but  them  that  would  put  there[1]  hands 
to  that  paper.  This  saith  M""  Paget  was  a  kind  of  Exconmiunicacion 
to  above  two  parts  of  the  congregacion  in  former  times,  ik  hath 
caused  the  diflSculty  of  adminis[t]ering  the  sacrament  because  he 
will  give  it  to  none  but  them  whose  names  are  at  his  New  Covenant. 
Those  New  Covenanted  must  choose  &  Call  him.  so  before  these  a 
sermon  was  made  by  M""  forbes. 

2.  There  was  ;(ctpoToveta.  first  by  all  the  men,  but  said  M''  forbes, 
I  see  what  the  men  do  :  but  what  do  the  weomen  do.  Therevpon 
they  fell  a  ;(€ipoTonising  too  &  Lift  vp  their  Hands. 

3.  There  was  ^^etpo^ecria.  The  Imposing  of  all  the  hands  of  the 
present  Ministers  except  M'"  Daye  who  was  not  desired  {M^  Grim 
ofweasell  [Wesel]  was  present  and  confirmes  all  this)  and  M""  Forbes 
held  them  above  halfe  an  bower  laijing  [sic]  his  burthen  vpon  him 
in  these  words  &  manner,  as  if  he  had  never  beene  made  minister.  / 

The  covenant  prepared  by  Peters  for  this  occasion,  as  has 
been  said,  is  a  remarkable  document.  No  separatist  before 
that  time  is  now  known  to  have  drawn  up  one  like  it.  There- 
fore, there  is  no  probability  that  Peters  borrowed  this  idea 
entirely  from  the  Brownists.  On  the  contrary,  he  needed  only 
to  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  Henry  Jacob,  and  at  the  same  time 
to  manifest  his  own  genius.  The  complete  text  of  the  covenant, 
as  given  by  Alexander  Browne,  reads  as  follows-: — 

Articles  or  Couenant  offered  by  M*".  Hugh  Peters  Minister,  to 
the  English  Congregation  at  Rotterdam,  to  his  Congregation  before 
admission  into  it  or  to  the  Lords  supper  to  be  subscribed  &,c : 
1633^ 

1  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  146  verso,  in  the  British  Museum. 

2  Ibid.,  fol.  161. 

3  This  title  is  written  ou  fol.  161  vei-so. 


302 


Early  English  Dissenters 


The  15  Artikells  and  Couenant  of  M""  Hugh  Peter  of  Rot- 

terdam^ 


To 
To 


Be  Contented  with  meet  triall  for  our  ffittnes  [Fittnes] 

to  be  members : 

Cleaue  in  hart  to  to  [sic]  the  truth  and  pure  worship  of 

God  and  to  oppose  all  wayes  of  Innouation  and  Corup- 

tion. 


^  This  copy  of  the  covenant  was  apparently  sent  on  Nov.  1,  1633. 
Later  Sir  William  Boswell  himself  seems  to  have  made  an  impi'oved 
transcript  of  Alexander  Browne's  copy,  and  to  have  sent  it  to  Archbishop 
Laud,  who  has  endorsed  it,  "Receivec?  Dece?>ib:  10.  1633."  Boswell's 
version  reads  as  follows : — 

The  15.  Articles  &  Couenant  of  Mr.  Hugh  Peter  Minister 
of  Rhotterdam. — 

1.  —     ''Be  contented  with  meet  try  all  for  our  fitnes  to  be  members. — 

2.  —       Cleaue  in  heart  to  the  truth  &  pure  worship  of  God  &  to  oppose 

all  wayes  of  Innouation  &  corruption. — 

3.  —       Suffer  the  word  to  be  the  guider  of  all  Controuersies. — 

4.  —       Labour  for  growth  of  knowledge,  &  to  that  end  to  conferr,  pray, 

heare,  &  meditate — 

5.  —       Submitt  to  Brotherly  admonicton  &  censure  without  enuie  or 

anger. 

6.  —       Be  throughly  reconciled  one  to  another  euen  in  iudgemewt  before 

wee  begin  this  work. — 

7.  —       Walk  in  all  kind  of  exactnes  both  in  regard  of  our  selues  & 

others. — 

8.  —       Forbeare  clogging  owr  selues  &  hearts  with  earthly  cares,  wAich 

is  the  bayn  of  Religion 

9.  To.-  \  Labour  to  get  a  great  measure  of  humilitie  &  meeknes  &  to 

bannish  pride  &  hignes  of  Spirit. — 

10.  —       Meditat  the  furthering  of  the  Gospell  at  home  <&  abroad  aswell 

in  our  persons  as  with  our  purses : — 

11.  —       Take  nearly  to  heart  our  Brethrens  condicion  &  to  conforme  our; 

selues  to  these  troublesome  times,  both  in  our  dyett  &  apparell, 
that  they  be  without  excesse  in  necessitie. — 

12.  —       Deale  with  all  kind  of  wisdome  &  gentlenes  towards  those  that 

are  without. — 

13.  —       Study  amitie  &  brotherly  loue. — 

14.  —       Put  one  another  in  mind  of  this  Couenant,  &  as  occasion  is 

ofFred  to  take  an  accompt  of  what  is  done  in  the  premisses. — 

15.  —       And  for  the  furthering  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ :  diligently  to 

instruct  children  &  seruants,  yea  &  to  look  to  our  wayes  and 
V  accompts  daily. 


This  document  is  endorsed  on  the  back  as  follows: — "The  15.  Articles 
or  Couenant  of  |  Mr.  Hu:  Peters  Minister  of  the  |  English  Congregation 
in  Rhoter|dara  proposed  to  them  befor[e]  |  their  admission  to  th^  Com- 
mu?iion  I  1633."    (S.  P.,  Dom.,  Charles  I,  Vol.  252  (32).) 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents 


303 


Suffer  the  word  to  be  the  guider  of  all  Oontrouersies 

Labor  for  growth  of   knowledge   and  to  that  end  to 

Confer,  pray,  heare,  and  meditate : 

Submitte  to  brotherly  admonision  and  Censure  with  out 

enuie  or  anger 

Be  throughly  reconciled  one  to  a  nother  euen  in  ludg- 

ment  be  fore  wee  begin  this  work 

Walk  in  all  kind  of  exactnes  both  in  regard  of  our 

selues,  and  others 

For  bear  Clogging  our  selues  and  harts  with  earthly 

Cares  w^ich  is  the  bayn  of  religion 

Labor  to  gett  A  great  meassuer  of  humillitie  and  meek- 

nes  and  to  bannish  pride  and  highnes  of  spirit 

Med[i]tate  the  furthering  of  the  gosspell  at  home  and  A 

braod[?]  as  well  in  our  perssons  as  with  our  pursses 

Take  nearly  to  hart  our  bretherens  Condition  and  to 

Conforme  our  selues  to  these  troble  same  tymes  both 

in  in  \sic\  dyet  and  apparrell  that  thay  be  with  out 

excesse  in  nessesitie 

Deall  with  all  kynd  of  wissdome  and  genttellnes  towards 

those  that  are  with  out 

Studie  Amitie  and  brotherly  loue 

Put  one  and  \s%c\  other  in  mynd  of  this  Couenant  and 

as  occassion  is  offered  to  take  an  Acompte  of  what  is 

done  in  the  premisses 

And  for  the  furthering  of  the  Kingdorae  of  C[h]rist : 

dilligently  to  instruckt  Chilldren  &  seruants :  yea  and 

to  look  to  our  wayes  and  accomptes  dayley : 

Finis 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  arrival  of  Puritan  ministers  in 
Holland,  and  especially  of  '  Jacobites '  who  required  church 
members  to  subscribe  a  covenant  before  they  might  partake 
of  the  Communion,  early  produced  an  effect.  At  Delft  and 
Rotterdam  in  1634,  we  are  told,  "many  honest  gentlemen" 
hoped  to  gain  admittance  to  "  the  sacrament",  but  hearing  of 
one  case  where  it  had  been  refused  on  the  ground  that  the 
person  who  made  the  request  had  not  signed  the  covenant,  they 
"  desisted  in  their  suite.  &  complaine  of  the  difficulty  of  the 
way  to  Heaven  here  [in  Holland  as  being]  more  [difficult]  then 
in  England  or  the  GospeH"^ 

In  the  Boswell  Papers  there  are  many  references  to  John 
Paget.     Of  him,  however,  we  perhaps  learn  less  that  is  new  than 

1  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  179  recto,  in  the  British  Museum. 


3 

To 

4 

To 

5 

To 

6 

To 

7 

To 

8 

To 

9 

To 

10 

To 

11 

To 

12 

To 

13 

To 

14 

To 

15 

304  Early  English  Dissenters 

of  two  other  Puritans,  Thomas  Hooker  and  John  Davenport, 
of  whom  he  so  bitterly  complains,  but  it  is  almost  certain  that 
without  his  faultj&nding  we  should  know  much  less  about  these 
men.  Paget  was  much  of  a  busy-body,  and  he  seems  never  to 
have  been  quite  content  either  with  his  own  affairs,  or  with 
those  of  other  people.  He  was  almost  always  at  variance  with 
some  of  the  English  clergymen  who  came  over  to  Holland,  and 
he  evidently  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  spur  up  their  hesitating 
orthodoxy  whenever  it  was  possible \  Thus  apparently  in  1633 
after  Hugh  Peters  had  left  Delft,  and  Thomas  Hooker  had  taken 
his  place  as  the  assistant  of  Mr  Forbes  in  the  congregation 
of  English  Merchants,  Paget  propounded  "  20  Proposicions  to 
M""  Hooker  "  which  the  latter  answered.  As  the  first  three  of 
these  have  to  do  with  the  Brownists,  they  may  be  cited  here. 
It  will  be  noticed  that  Hooker  had  never  before  studied  out  a 
complete  answer  to  the  first  point,  but  in'all  his  replies  he  shows 
himself  to  have  been  a  somewhat  broad-minded,  though  also 
loyal,  Puritan  son  of  the  Church.  Hooker,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, like  Hugh  Peters  and  John  Davenport  afterwards  found 
his  way  to  New  England.  The  following  are  the  three  above- 
mentioned  questions  which  Hooker  was  asked  to  answer'^ : — 

Quest:  1  Whither  it  be  lawfull  for  any  to  resort  vnto  the  Publique 
Meetings  of  the  Brownists,  and  to  Communicate  with  them  in  the 
WORD  of  God.  //  Negatur 

Answ:     To  separate  from  the  faithfull  Assemblies,  and  Churches  in 

1  Even  Paget,  though  not  a  Congregational  Puritan,  seems  to  have 
believed  in  the  employment  of  simple  covenants  against  evil,  but  of 
course  not  in  the  use  of  covenants  of  separation  from  the  Church  of 
England.  Henry  Ainsworth  had  no  respect  for  such  covenants,  as  ap- 
pears in  a  letter  of  his  published  by  Paget  in  his  "Arrow  Against  the 
Separation,  Amsterdam,  1618,  p.  121,  where  Ainsworth  probably  gives 
the  text  of  the  covenant  employed  in  Paget's  own  church:  "  As  for  your 
covenant  which  you  mention,  to  separate  from  knowen  evils,  and  to  serve 
the  Lord  in  the  Gospel  of  his  Son,  so  far  as  is  revealed  vnto  you:  they  are 
hut  generals,  such  as  Arians,  Anabaptists  Paptists,  {and  who  not  that 
prof  esse  Christ?)  will  make  also:..."  Paget  says  elsewhere  ("An  Answer 
To  the  unjust  complaints  of  William  Best",  Amsterdam,  1635,  p.  145), 
that  the  Dutch  Reformed  churches  also  employed  covenants  such  as  was 
used  in  his  church. 

-  Add.  MS.  6394,  fol.  67  recto  and  verso,  in  the  British  Museum. 


The  Rise  of  the  Lidependents  305 

England,  as  noe  Churches  is  an  error  in  ludgment,  and  sinne  in 
practize,  held  and  mayntained  by  the  Brownists,  &  therefore  to 
Comunicate  with  them,  either  in  this  their  opinion  or  practize,  is 
sinnefull  &  vtterly  vnlawfull,  but  for  a  Christian  both  their 
opinion,  &  practize,  to  heare  occasionally  amongst  them,  &  so  to 
Comunicate  with  them  in  that  part  of  Gods  worde  (which  I  con- 
ceaue  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  first  Quaere)  is  not  so  farre,  as  I  yet 
see  simply  vnlawfull,  but  may  prove  occasionally  ofFensiue,  if  either 
by  goeing,  wee  should  encourage  them  to  goe  on,  in  their  Coui'se  of 
seperation,  or  els  by  our  vnwise  expressions,  might  serue  to  weaken 
ours,  to  like  of  it  our  selves,  and  so  to  drawe  them  to  a  farther 
approbation  of  that  way,  then  was  before  meet,  wherevpon  it 
followes,  if  wee  giue  these  occasions  of  offence,  wee  sinne  if  wee  do 
not  obstaine  [sic],  but  if  these  occasions  of  offence  may  be  remoued, 
by  our  Constant  renouncing  of  their  Course  of  [on]  the  one  side, 
and  by  our  free  and  open  profession  of  our  intents,  on  the  other 
side.  That  wee  goe  only  to  heare  some  sauorie  point  opened,  and 
to  benefitt  by  the  guifts  of  some  able  Minister,  that  may  come 
amongst  them,  if  I  say  the  giving  of  any  lust  offence  by  these,  or 
any  other  meanes,  may  be  avoided,  I  conceive  then  it  is  not  a  sinne 
to  heare  them  occasionally,  and  that  some  men  may  prevent  such 
occasions,  it  is  to  mee,  it  is  to  me  [sic]  a  very  disputable  question 
not  hauing  euer  studied  this  point  before.  / 

Queers  [?]  2  Whether  those  Members  of  the  Church  [of  England] 
which  somtymes  heare  them,  &  stifly  maintaine  a  Libertie  therein 
are  to  be  tollerated  or  rather  censured.  //  censured 

Respo:  For  the  practise  of  members  according  to  the  former 
Caution  &  interpretation,  being  taken  vp  &  mayntayned  though 
stiffly,  which  Argumente,  because  it  is  but  questionable  and  dis- 
putable before  they  be  fully  convicted  of  their  sinne,  they  ought 
to  be  tollei'ated  rather  then  censured :  And  this  moderacion  in 
things  which  are  disputable,  and  not  absolutely  necessary  to  salva- 
tion. . . . 

Qu:  3  Whether  such  of  the  Brownists  as  haue  not  renounced  their 
Seperation  from  the  Church  of  England,  Nor  yett  allow  Comunion 
with  the  Puplique  [sic]  estate  thereof  may  lawfully  be  receiued  for 
members  of  our  Church  //  Negatur. 

Resp:  The  not  renouncing  seperacion  from  the  faithfull  assemblies 
in  England  and  the  not  allowance  of  Comunion  with  the  Publique 
state  of  the  Church  of  England  This  meer  opinion  can  in  no  wise 
make  a  man  vnfitt  to  be  receaved  a  member  of  this  Congregation, 
vnlesse  wee  will  say  that  such  a  man  (being  in  his  iudgment  (fe 
life  otherwise  altogether  vnblameable)  in  ludicious  Charitie  is  not 
a  visible  Christian,  which  is  a  more  riged  Censure  then  the  wisest 
of  the  seperation  would  giue  waie  vnto,  in  a  propoi'tionable  kinde, 
and  I  suppose  a  pious  hart  dare  affirme,... 

B.  20 


306  Early  English  Dissenters 

We  now  come  to  the  experiences  of  John  Davenport.  In 
the  first  place,  it  should  be  said  that  the  so-called  Jessey  Records 
throw  a  good  deal  of  light  on  the  beginnings  of  his  Nonconformity. 
From  these  Memoranda  it  appears  that  during  the  year  1632, 
while  John  Lathrop's  Independent  Puritan  congregation  was 
suffering  much  from  persecution,  Davenport  preached  a  sermon 
in  condemnation  of  Independency.  Some  notes  of  what  he  had 
said  were  brought  to  Lathrop's  people  who  were  challenged  for 
an  answer.  The  challenge  was  accepted,  but  in  order  that  any 
misconceptions  might  be  avoided,  a  letter  was  sent  to  Davenport 
expressing  the  hope  that  he  would  send  his  own  notes  of  his 
sermon  for  their  perusal.  This,  we  are  told,  he  "  loveingly " 
did.  Lathrop's  congregation  accordingly  studied  what  Davenport 
had  written,  and  wrote  thereto  an  extended  answer,  with  the 
effect  that  he  never  again  went  to  Communion  in  the  Church  of 
England,  "  but  went  away  when  the  Sacrament  day  came,  and 
afterward  preached,  publickly  &  privately  for  the  truth,  &  soon 
afterward  went  to  Holland,  where  he  suffered  somewhat  for  the 
truths  sake,..." 

Parts  of  three  or  four  letters  in  the  Boswell  Papers  relating 
to  Davenport  are  given  in  the  volume  of  documents.  From 
these  letters  we  may  learn  much  concerning  the  Continental 
life  of  this  man  who  later  became  so  prominent  in  New 
England.  It  appears  that  Davenport  came  to  Holland  early  in 
1633/34  in  order  to  escape  persecution,  and  hoped  to  return  to 
England  after  an  absence  of  three  or  four  months.  He  was  now 
invited  to  become  co-pastor  with  John  Paget  in  the  English 
congregation  at  Amsterdam,  but  unfortunately  his  views  and 
Paget's  were  not  entirely  in  harmony.  The  subject  in  regard  to 
which  they  were  chiefly  at  variance  was  the  administration  of 
baptism.  It  seems  that  Davenport  objected  to  baptizing  infants 
"  vnles  he  approve  [approved]  the  parents  faith,  and  life  ",  while 
Paget  would  have  him  baptize  any  infant  brought  to  him  that 
had  not  already  been  baptized.  The  situation  was  made  the 
more  difficult  because,  according  to  the  Dutch  custom,  both  of 
the  ministers  in  such  a  congregation,  were  supposed  to  be  of  equal 
authority,  and  were  expected  to  join  in  baptizing  every  child, 
the  "  one  reading  the  forme  &  explicacion  of  it.  and  the  other 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  307 

sprinkling  the  water  with  those  words  In  the  name  &c." 
Without  a  willingness  for  such  co-operation,  therefore,  Paget 
and  Davenport  could  not  be  suitable  colleagues  "  in  that 
pastorall  charge  ".  Davenport  and  his  friends  liked  this  arrange- 
ment so  little,  that  they  persuaded  two  of  the  Dutch  ministers 
to  represent  their  point  of  view  to  Paget.  He,  however,  could 
not  be  prevailed  upon  to  accept  their  standpoint,  and  thought 
"  that  a  more  sollemne  meeting  should  be  had,  &  Damport 
perswaded  to  a  better  sense,  or  else  no  admission."  "  Wherefore 
shortly  after ",  it  is  reported,  "  5  of  the  Dutch  ministers  came 
vnto  m'  Pagetts  house,  and  there  expected  m''  Damport  who 
could  not  be  brought  to  come  vnto  them."  However,  they  held 
a  consultation,  drew  up  a  list  of  five  conditions  to  which  they 
would  require  both  Mr  Paget  and  Mr  Davenport  to  agree, 
subscribed  it  with  their  five  names,  and  sent  the  paper  to 
Davenport.  He  adroitly  gave  them  to  understand  that  he 
was  satisfied  with  the  articles  and  accordingly  preached  before 
Mr  Paget,  but  at  the  close,  on  being  requested  formally  to 
accept  the  conditions  which  had  been  imposed  upon  him, 
including  those  relating  to  the  administration  of  baptism,  he 
drew  back,  and  for  some  time  no  Dutch  minister  was  able  to 
speak  with  him.  After  this  event  Davenport  apparently  went 
to  the  Hague  to  consult  the  English  Ambassador  about  his 
difficulties.  Two  of  the  Elders  of  the  church  now  suggested 
that  the  Classis  should  allow  Davenport  to  become  Paget's 
"  Assistant  in  preaching  ",  but  should  not  urge  him  further  to 
become  his  co-pastor.  They  would  recommend  this  course 
because  of  "  the  excellency  of  his  guifts,  &  his  discreet  &  peaceable 
carriage."  Some  members  of  the  Dutch  Classis,  however,  were 
evidently  becoming  suspicious  of  Davenport's  orthodoxy  in  other 
respects.  They  said  that  Paget  required  a  colleague,  not  merely 
an  assistant  lecturer  or  preacher,  and  it  was  accordingly  decided 
that  a  deputation  should  be  sent  to  Davenport  to  show  their 
disapproval  of  his  refusal  to  accept  their  conditions  concerning 
the  administration  of  baptism. 

In  a  letter  of  Griffin  Higgs  to  Sir  William  Boswell,  dated 
April  9  (Old  Style),  1634,  it  is  stated  that  Davenport  was  still 
a  [non-separatist]  Nonconformist  with  regard  to  both  the  Dutch 

20—2 


308  Early  English  Dissenters 

and  the  English  churches  in  Holland.  The  Dutch  ministers 
had  already  silenced  him,  and  unless  he  should  conform  before 
May  1,  the  church  would  reject  him.  The  remark  is  also  made, 
that  the  Dutch  ministers  disliked  the  English  Nonconformists 
[Puritans],  "and  would  more  Easilie  entertaine  Conformable  men 
of  Learning,  and  good  life,  and  moderation."  Further,  it  was 
already  being  rumoured  at  Amsterdam,  that  thereafter  financial 
support  would  not  be  given  [by  the  city  authorities]  to  any 
English  clergyman  who  came  thither  contrary  to  "  the  King  of 
Englands  pleasure  ". 

Unfavourable  reports  of  Davenport's  troubles  in  Amsterdam 
had  apparently  reached  England  before  March  18,  1634,  and 
had  exasperated  the  "  ArchBishop  of  Canterbury  to  reproachfull 
inuectiues,  and  bitter  mena[ces  ?]  against  me  [Davenport]  in 
the  [Court  of]  High  Commission,  whereby  my  [his]  returne  [to 
England]  is  [was]  made  much  more  difficult,  and  hazardous 
then  I  [he]  could  suspect ".  This  sentence  occurs  in  a  letter  of 
Davenport's  to  Boswell  written  on  the  above  date,  in  which 
he  shows  that  he  did  not  maintain  the  views  of  Familists, 
Anabaptists,  or  Brownists,  but  was  an  opponent  of  them  all, 
and  that  he  would  not  have  left  England  if  he  "could  haue 
bene  secure  of  a  safe  and  quiett  abode  in  my  [his]  deare  natiue 
country".  He  says  he  is  still  a  loyal  subject  of  the  king,  and 
if  his  enemies  continue  to  slander  him,  he  feels  it  to  be  his 
duty  to  publish  an  "  Apollogy  "  to  the  world,  so  that  it  may  be 
generally  known  why  he  has  changed  his  views  and  practice. 
"  But ",  he  adds,  "  it  is  not  my  purpose  so  to  doe,  vnles 
the  continuance  of  iniurious  aspersions  make  it  necessary, 
in  which  case  the  law  of  God  and  of  nature  bindeth  men 
to  such  a  Vindicacion  of  theyre  innocency  as  the  Case  re- 
quireth." 

In  spite  of  the  opposition  of  Paget,  and  even  without  the 
consent  of  the  Dutch  Classis,  the  Elders  of  the  English  Puritan 
church  at  Amsterdam  seem  to  have  chosen  Davenport  to  be 
assistant  pastor  of  the  congregation.  Davenport  was  willing  to 
recognize  such  a  congregational  election,  and  Paget  says  he  had 
soon  "gathered  unto  himself  a  great  and  solemne  assembly 
apart,  by  preaching  unto  them  at  set  times  in  a  private  house, 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  809 

without  allowance  of  the  Church  "S  which,  of  course,  was  also 
without  the  permission  of  the  Dutch  Classis.  Davenport  himself 
modestly  describes  these  meetings  as  "  a  Catechising  the  family 
where  he  lived,  every  Lords-day  after  the  Sermons  were  ended  at 
5  a  clock  at  night,  where  many  receaved  much  edification". 
Paget  asks  with  some  feeling  if  such  a  description  of  these 
catechisings  is  not  a  mockery,  "  when  as  the  members  of  30  or 
40  families  or  more  have  bene  reckoned  to  assemble  together  in 
that  place?..." 

However,  these  meetings  cannot  have  been  held  long. 
Paget  did  not  like  the  way  in  which  the  church  had  supported 
Davenport  contrary  to  his  wishes,  and  accordingly  seems  to 
have  complained  to  the  Classis,  with  the  result  that  the  private 
meetings  were  stopped.  This  effectual  boycotting  of  Davenport, 
and  particularly  the  publication  in  1634  of  an  anonymous 
pamphlet  relating  to  him,  which  was  written  by  William  Best, 
and  entitled,  "A  ivst  Complaint  against  an  univst  Doer.  Wherein 
Is  declared  the  miserable  slaverie  &  bondage  that  the  English 
Church  of  Amsterdam  is  now  in,  by  reason  of  the  Tirannicall 
government  and  corrupt  doctrine,  of  Mr.  lohn  Pagett...",  seem 
to  have  emboldened  him  to  publish  a  defence  of  his  cause  in  a 
book  bearing  the  title,  "A  Protestation",  etc.,  1634.  In  1635 
Paget  made  reply  to  both  these  works  in  a  book  entitled,  "An 
Answer  To  the  unjust  complaints  of  William  Best,... Also  an 
Answer  to  M^  lohn  Davenport,...",  Amsterdam,  and  in  the 
following  year,  1636,  Davenport  answered  Paget  in  "An  Apolo- 
geticall  Reply..."  With  this  work  the  published  controversy 
appears  to  have  ended. 

Although  it  was  said  of  Thomas  Hooker  and  John  Davenport, 
"  that  they  were  such  as  abhorre  all  schisme ",  the  attitude 
which  these  early  Independent  Puritans  took  towards  the 
separatists  was  somewhat  different  from  that  taken  by  the 
representatives  of  the  older  Puritanism,  such  as  Thomas  Cart- 
wright,  and  later,  John  Paget.  Paget  says  that  Hooker,  for 
instance,  "  maintayned  that  such  of  the  Brownists,  as  persisted 
in  their  schisme  or  separation  from  the  Church  of  England, 

'  John  Paget's  "  An  Answer  To  the  unjust  complaints  of  William  Best", 
Amsterdam,  1635,  p.  74. 


310  Early  English  Dissenters 

might  lawfully  be  receaved  of  us  for  members  in  our  Church 
[which  represented  the  Church  of  England  in  Amsterdam] " ; 
that  he  continued  to  consider  as  members  of  the  Church  of 
England  "  such  as  went  to  heare  the  Brownists  in  their 
schismaticall  assembly  " ;  that  he  "  maintyned  that  private  men 
might  preach  and  expound  the  Scriptures  at  set  times  and 
places,  where  the  members  of  sundry  families  met  together, 
and  this  without  allowance  of  the  Church " ;  and  that  he 
even  asserted  "  that  Churches  combined  together  in  the  Classis, 
might  choose  a  Minister,  either  without  or  against  the  consent 
of  the  Classis  under  which  they  stood  "^  Both  Hooker  and 
Davenport  appear  to  have  been  willing  to  consult  the  Classis  in 
specially  important,  if  not  in  all,  matters,  an  attitude,  however, 
for  which  Paget  expressed  his  dislike  by  remarking  "  that  this 
pretended  reverence  is  [was]  no  more  then  that  which  M\  lacob 
&  his  company  did  give  to  Classes  and  Synods,  for  counsaile 
and  advice  ".  "  Yea  ",  says  he,  "  the  Brownists  themselves  doe 
seem  to  give  as  much  "^  From  these  various  statements  it 
can  readily  be  seen  that  the  Independent  Puritans  evidently 
manifested  at  least  a  little  more  tolerance  towards  the  Barrowists 
than  was  shown  them  by  the  Presbyterian  Puritans, — a  tolerance, 
which  must  have  tended  on  the  whole  to  the  considerable 
increase  of  English  separatism, 

Henry  Jacob  returned  to  England  in  or  about  1616,  and  in 
that  year  boldly  instituted  in  London  an  Independent  Puritan 
congregation.  This  was  the  first  church  organized  on  English 
soil  to  follow  in  general  the  principles  enunciated  several  years 
before  by  Jacob  and  Bradshaw.  The  story  of  the  organization 
and  development  of  this  congregation  will  be  given  in  the 
next  chapter.  The  growth  of  Independent,  or  Congregational, 
Puritanism  in  England  at  first  appears  to  have  been  rather  slow, 
but  about  1640  it  was  evidently  spreading  in  various  parts  of 
the  country.  As  was  not  unnatural,  these  Independent  Puritans 
were  often  confused  with  the  Brownists  or  separatists,  and  were 
so  called,  though  in  reality  not  separatists.    Such  Independents, 

'  John  Paget's  ^'An  Answer  To  the  unjust  complaints  of  William  Beat", 
Amsterdam,  1635,  p.  74. 
2  Ibid.,  p.  84. 


The  Rise  of  the  Independents  311 

I  believe,  were  those  persons  who  are  referred  to  under  the  name 
of  Brownists  in  a  letter  of  Robert  Abbot,  Vicar  of  Cranford, 
written  to  Sir  Edward  Deering,  and  dated  March  15, 1640.  The 
passage  to  which  reference  is  made,  reads  as  follows^ : — 

These  Brownists  are  not  an  inconsederable  part.  They  grows  in 
many  parts  of  the  kingdom,  and  in  yowr  deare  cuntrey  amongst  the 
rest.  And  though  it  was  thought  that  the  high  courses  of  some 
Bishops  weare  the  cause  of  theire  reuolt  from  vs  :  yet  now  they 
professe  that  weare  Bishops  reraooued,  the  common  prayer  book, 
and  Ceremonies  taken  away,  they  would  not  loyne  with  vs  in 
communion.  They  stick  not  onely  at  our  Bishops,  seruice,  and 
Ceremonies,  but  at  our  church.  They  would  haue  eueiy  particular 
congregation  to  be  independent,  and  neither  to  be  kept  in  order  (by 
rules  giuen)  by  king.  Bishops,  Councels,  or  Synods.  They  would 
haue  the  votes,  about  euery  matter  of  Jurisdiction,  in  cheefe  [1], 
admission  of  members,  and  ministers,  excommunication,  and  ab- 
solution, to  be  drawne  vp  from  the  whole  body  of  the  church  in 
communion,  both  men,  and  women/.  They  would  haue  none  enter 
communion  but  by  solmne  Couenant.  Not  that  made  in  Baptisms, 
or  renewed  in  the  supper  of  the  Lord,  but  another  for  reformation 
after  theire  owne  way :  and  when  they  find  it  not  to  be  so  with  vs, 
they  keep  aloof e,  and  prize  [?]  more  their  conuersion  to  theire  owne 
opinions  (which,  mostly,  are  matters  of  fact  not  of  faith)  then  theire 
conuersion  from  theire  sinn[s'?]  of  nature  and  wickedness  [?]  of  life 
which  they  receiued  from  vs  [?]. 

Before  1645  neither  separatism  nor  Independent  Puritanism 
seems  to  have  been  really  strong  in  London.  Says  Robert 
Baillie  in  1645:  "for  i\\e...Broxunists,  their  number  at  London 
or  Amsterdam  is  but  very  small "^  The  Independent  Puritans 
of  London  he  likewise  reports  "  as  yet  to  consist  [of]  much 
within  One  thousand  persons;  men,  women,  and  all  who  to 
this  day  have  put  themselves  in  any  known  Congregation  of 
that  way,  being  reckoned.  But  setting  aside  number,  for 
other  respects  they  are  of  so  eminent  a  condition,  that  not 
any  nor  all  the  rest  of  the  Sects  are  comparable  to  them"^ 

1  Stowe  MS.  184,  fol.  27  recto  and  verso,  in  the  British  Museimi. 

2  In  "A  Disvasive  from  the  Errours  Of  the  Time",  London,    1645, 
p.  17. 

a  Ibid.,  p.  53. 


CHAPTEB  XIII 

THE  HISTORY  OF  HENRY  JACOB'S  INDEPENDENT  PURITAN 
CONGREGATION  IN  LONDON ;  AND  THE  STORY  OF  THE 
RISE  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PARTICULAR,  OR  CALVINISTIC, 
ANABAPTISTS.  WITH  A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF 
THE  GOULD  MANUSCRIPT  APPENDED 

The  facts  to  be  presented  in  this  chapter  must  chiefly  be 
gleaned  from  the  first  two  sections  of  the  Gould  Manuscript 
preserved  at  Regent's  Park  College,  London.  These  two  sec- 
tions are  the  so-called  Jessey  Records  (preferably,  Memoranda), 
and  the  Kiffin  Manuscript,  which  up  to  the  year  1642  are 
given  in  full  in  the  volume  of  documents.  A  critical  estimate 
of  the  trustworthiness  of  the  Gould  Manuscript  as  an  historical 
source  will  be  found  appended  to  this  chapter. 

While  the  Jessey  Memoranda  and  the  Kiffin  Manuscript,  as 
preserved  in  the  Gould  transcript,  are  undoubtedly  to  be  regarded 
as  generally  trustworthy  historical  documents,  and  while  it  is 
certain  that  they  were  transcribed  with  great  care  from  Benjamin 
Stinton's  now  lost  "  Repository  ",  it  should  not  be  thought  that 
every  word  in  them  is  exact,  or  every  statement  true.  The 
early  memoranda,  however,  to  which  Stinton  was  indebted  for 
the  material  he  presents  in  these  two  first  sections,  were 
evidently  the  work  of  persons  who  were  well  informed  as  to 
the  details  of  the  events  about  which  they  wrote,  but  it  is  also 
probable  that  they  had  to  rely  much  on  their  memory,  and  that 
their  work,  therefore,  contains  some,  if  not  a  good  many,  minor 
inaccuracies.  The  mode  of  expression,  also,  is  so  obscure  in 
places,  that  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain  the  precise  meaning. 
In  fact,  this  rambling  style  undoubtedly  accounts  for  some  of 
the  blunders  of  the  Rev.  Daniel  Neal,  which  Thomas  Crosby, 
the  Baptist  historian,  so  much  deplored.  Some  of  the  state- 
ments in  Stinton's  "  Repository  "  must  have  seemed  to  Neal 


Henry  Jacob's  Congt'egation  in  London    313 

a  veritable  labyrinth,  and  such  they  remain  to-day  as  tran- 
scribed in  the  Gould  Manuscript. 

Out  of  these  disordered,  and  not  always  exact,  Memoranda 
it  is  the  task  of  the  historian  to  make  a  continuous  and 
intelligible  narrative.  Fortunately,  this  can  be  very  largely 
accomplished  by  a  reconstruction  of  the  facts  contained  in  the 
Gould  Manuscript  based  upon  a  study  of  the  best  available 
records  and  books,  and  a  critical  comparison  of  their  contents 
with  the  account  given  in  the  manuscript. 

1.     Henry  Jacob's  Independent  Puritan  Congregation 
in  London. 

The  history  of  the  Independent  Puritan  congregation  or- 
ganized by  Henry  Jacob  at  London  in  1616  is  very  fully  given 
down  to  the  year  1640  in  the  previously  mentioned  Jessey 
Memoranda.  From  this,  and  other  sources,  we  learn,  or  infer, 
that  Jacob  returned  to  London  from  Holland  in  or  about  1616, 
after  having  endured  approximately  ten  years'  exile,  and  having 
written  several  works  relating  to  the  reformation  of  the  Church 
of  England' ;  and  that  since  1603,  in  fact,  he  had  discussed  this 
subject  both  in  England  and  in  the  Low  Countries  with  various 
men  including  John  Robinson,  pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers. 
After  his  return  to  London,  also,  Jacob  held  many  conferences 
with  noted  Puritan  preachers,  as  Mr  Throgmorton,  Walter 
Travers,  Mr  Wing,  Richard  Maunsell,  and  John  Dodd  (but  it  is 
not  reported  that  Jacob  consulted  with  any  separatists),  in  order 
to  secure  their  opinions  as  to  the  advisability  of  organizing  an 
Independent  Puritan  congregation  in  that  city,  such  as  he 
appears  to  have  ministered  to  in  Middelburg  since  1605. 

As  an  outcome  of  these  conferences,  which  on  the  whole 
seem  to  have  been  encouraging,  the  church  was  "  gathered  "  in 
1616  in  the  following  manner: — Henry  Jacob,  Sabine  Stares- 
more  (otherwise  spelled  Staesmore,  Staismore,  or  Stasmore), 
Richard  Browne,  David  Prior,  Andrew  Almey,  William  Through- 
ton,  John  Allen,  Mr  Gibs,  Edward  Farre,  Henry  Goodall,  and 

*  The  titles  of  these  books  are  not  very  accurately  given  in  the  Jessey 
Memoranda,  but  the  original  editions  are  all  to  be  found  in  the  Bodleian 
Library. 


314  Early  English  Dissenters 

several  others  appointed  a  day  of  fasting  and  prayer,  on  which 
occasion  the  matter  of  the  proposed  organization  of  the  congre- 
gation was  chiefly  considered.  At  the  end  of  the  day  it  was 
decided  to  institute  the  church,  and  those  who  wished  to  have 
a  share  in  the  undertaking  "joyning  togeather  jojTied  both 
hands  each  with  other  Brother  and  stood  in  a  Ringwise :  their 
intent  being  declared,  H.  Jacob  and  each  of  the  Rest  made 
some  confession  or  Profession  of  their  Faith  &  Repentance,  some 
were  longer  some  were  briefer.  Then  they  Covenanted  togeather 
to  walk  in  all  Gods  Ways  as  he  had  revealed  or  should  make 
known  to  them"\  This  is  the  best  extant  text  of  the  covenant 
of  Jacob's  church. 

Within  a  few  days,  notice  of  the  organization  of  the  congre- 
gation was  given  "  to  the  Brethren  here  of  the  Antient  Church  ", 
or  the  London  remnant  of  the  church  of  Barrowe,  Greenwood, 
and  Johnson,  which  probably  was  now  under  the  leadership  of 
Mr  (Nicholas)  Lee.  Perhaps  Jacob  thought  that  the  members 
of  Lee's  congregation  would  join  with  him,  but  they  did  not, 
and  although  he  maintained  his  friendly  attitude  towards  the 
Barrowists,  which  they  may  have  reciprocated  for  a  time^  they 
appear  before  long  to  have  come  to  regard  Mr  "  lakobs  people  " 
as  "  Idolators  in  their  going  to  the  parish  assemblies  "^ 

After  the  organization  had  been  effected,  and  that  fact  had 
been  announced  to  the  "Antient  Church  ",  Jacob  "  was  Chosen 
&  Ordained  Pastor ",  "  &  many  Saints  were  joyned  to  them  ". 
In  the  same  year  "  with  the  advice  &  consent  of  the  Church, 
&  of  some  of  those  Reverend  [Puritan]  Preachers  beforesaid  ", 

*  The  spelling  and  punctuation  of  the  quotations  employed  in  thia 
chapter  have  occasionally  been  somewhat  altered  when  such  changes 
seemed  reasonable,  or  helpful  to  the  understanding. 

2  As  has  already  been  seen  in  the  preceding  chapter,  the  Independent 
Puritans  maintained  a  more  lenient  attitude  towards  the  separatists  than 
did  the  older  Puritans,  and  subsequent  events  would  seem  to  suggest  that 
the  London  Barrowists  may  not  fully  have  understood  the  status  of  Jacob's 
church.  However,  it  should  also  be  kept  in  mind  that  even  Barrowe  and 
Greenwood  entertained  a  respect  for  the  "  Reformed  "  churches,  after  which, 
to  some  extent,  the  Independent  Puritan  congregations  were  modelled. 

5  John  Robinson's  "A  Treatise  of  the  Lawfvlnes  of  hearing  of  the 
Ministers  in  the  church  of  England",  1634,  p.  69. 


Henry  Jacob's  Congregation  in  London    315 

he  published  a  small  work  entitled,  "Anno  Domini  1616.  | 
A  I  CONFESSION  |  AND  PROTESTATION  OF  THE  | 
FAITH  OF  CERTAIN E  CHRISTIANS  \  in  England,  holding 
it  necessary  to  observe,  &  (  keepe  all  Christes  true  substantial! 
Ordinances  |  for  his  Church  visible  and  Politicall  (that  is,  in-| 
dued  with  power  of  outward  spiritual!  Govern- j  ment)  under 
the  Gospel;  though  the  same  |  doe  differ  from  the  common 
or-|der  of  the  Land.  |  Published  for  the  clearing  of  the  said 
Christians  |  from  the  slaunder  of  Schisme,  and  Noveltie,  |  and 
also  of  Separation,  &  undutifull-|nes  to  the  Magistrate,  which 
their  |  rash  Adversaries  doe  falsely  |  cast  upon  them.  |  Also  an 
humble  Petition  to  the  K.  Majestie  for  |  Toleration  there- 
in. I  ...",8°,  72-1-48  unnumbered  pages.  The  last  forty-eight 
pages  have  a  separate  title-page  called,  "A  |  COLLECTION  | 
OF  SUNDRY  I  matters; ...  |  Anno  Domini,  MDCXVL"  The 
Jessey  Memoranda  say  that  a  portion  of  this  last  part  was 
"made  by  Mr.  Wring  [?Wing^]  the  [Puritan]  Preacher." 

As  was  natural,  Jacob's  ideas  seem  to  have  changed  some- 
what between  the  years  1604  and  1616.  For  instance,  about 
1605  he  speaks  of  suitable  church  officers  as  being  "  A  Pastor 
or  Bishop,  with  Elders,  &  Deacons  ".  In  a  later  undated  work 
by  him  entitled,  "A  plaine  and  cleere  Exposition  of  the  2'*. 
Commandement "  a  change  is  noticeable.  The  copy  in  the 
Bodleian  Library  lacks  a  special  title-page,  though  it  probably 
once  had  one.  The  work  is  mentioned  in  the  Jessey  Memoranda 
as  having  been  published  in  1610,  which  is  apparently  not  far 
from  the  connect  date.  In  this  publication  Jacob  makes  two 
statements  that  should  be  cited  here : — 

But  alvvaies  now  the  ordinary  Ministeries  viz.  Pastors,  Teachers, 
Elders,  and  Beacons  to  particular  Congregations,  are  to  remains  both 
as  only  lavvfuU,  necessary,  and  sufficient  for  vs  "\ 

Fourthly  all  religious  Signes  «fe  Ceremonies  in  Scripture  like- 
wise commended  vnto  vs,  are  in  this  Affirmative;  As  Baptisme, 
and  the  Lords  Table,  with  all  theire  proper  appurtenances :  as  in 
Baptisme,  Dipping*;... Sitting  in  the  eating  and  drinking  togeather 

*  As  suggested  in  the  "Transactions  of  the  Baptist  Historical  Society" 
for  January,  1910,  p.  212,  note. 

2  Sig.  Ee  recto  and  verso. 

3  In  this  statement  Jacob  follows  the  practice  advocated  as  preferable 


316  Early  English  Dissenters 

at  the  holy  table.     Also  imposition  of  hands  (where  it  is  meete)  by 
the  deputy  or  deputies  of  the  Church  &c^ 

In  these  last  two  citations  Jacob  advocates  such  officers  for 
a  church  as  any  Puritan  of  the  older  type,  or  a  Barrowist,  would 
have  recommended.  Later  in  1616  he  appears  to  have  re- 
turned to  his  earlier  and  simpler  views  with  regard  to  church 
officers.  The  following  passages  in  Jacob's  previously  mentioned 
work  published  in  1616  will  repay  examination : — 

14.  Wee  believe  each  Church  ought  to  have  one  Pastor  at 
least :  and  that  they  may  have  moe  then  one,  if  the  number  of  the 
Church,  and  their  meanes  be  fitt  for  it,  and  such  plenty  of  choice 
may  be  had.  Howbeit  we  judge  that  it  is  best,  and  most  agreable 
to  the  last  Apostlelike  practise,  that  even  where  many  are,  yet  that 
one  have  (during  life)  a  precedencie  and  prioritie  in  order  and  place 
(not  in  power)  before  the  rest.  Revel.  2.  1.  &c.  Touching  their 
power  and  authority  in  Church  government,  we  believe  (whether 
they  be  in  each  Church  single,  or  moe  then  one)  they  have  all  that 
they  have,  and  nothing  more,  then  what  the  Congregation  doth 
commit  unto  them,  and  which  they  may  (when  need  requireth) 
againe  take  away  from  them;... we  judge  each  proper  Pastor  may 
and  ought  to  be  trusted  by  the  Congregation  with  the  managing  of 
all  points  of  their  Ecclesiasticall  affaires  and  government  so  farr, 
that  he  with  his  assistants  (when  he  hath  any)  doe  execute  and 
administer  the  same :  yet  so,  that  in  matters  of  waight  the  whole 
Congregation  doe  first  understand  thereof  before  any  thing  be 
finished,  and  the  finall  act  be  done  in  the  presence  of  the  whole 
Congregation,  and  also  that  they  (the  sayd  Congregation)  doe  not 
manifestly  dissent  therefrom^. 

23.  Concerning  making  of  mariage,  and  burying  the  dead,  we 
believe  that  they  are  no  actions  of  a  Church  Minister  (because  they 
are  no  actions  spirituall)  but  civill.  Neither  are  Ministers  called 
to  any  such  busines  :  Neither  is  there  so  much  as  one  example  of 
any  such  practise  in  the  whole  book  of  God...^ 

Wherefore  we  humbly  pray  every  upright-harted  servant  of  God 
to  consider,  that  it  is  not  possible  for  us  (knowing  that  which  we 
know)  to  give  this  fore-rehearsed  due  obedience  unto  Christ,  but  by 
walking  in  this  way,  which  wee  doe.  Which  also  cannot  be  but 
first  by  eschewing  the  evill,  and  then  by  doing  the  good.     That 

in   the   Book  of  Common  Prayer,  but  sprinkling  was  about  this  time 
becoming  universal  in  England. 

1  Sig.  Eo  verso. 

2  '"'■Anno  Domini  1616.  A  Confession  and  Protestation...",  sig.  By 
recto  and  verao. 

2  Ihid.,  sig.  Cs  recto. 


Henry  Jacob's  Congregation  in  London    317 

is ;  first  by  renouncing  to  be  ordinary  and  constant  members  of 
any  Diocesan,  or  Provincial!  Church  visible  politicall.  (Because  the 
forme  of  these  is  wholly  without  Gods  word  in  the  Gospell,  yea 
contrary  to  it.)  And  then  also  of  the  Parishes  (as  naturall  parts) 
depending  on  them,  and  on  their  Lord  Bishops  ;... Wherefore  thus 
farr  forth  onely  wee[?]  leave  our  sayd  parishes  also :  but  no  further. 
That  is,  to  be  in  them  no  ordinary  and  constant  members ;  but 
members  in  them  occasionally  we  refuse  not  to  be,  seing  in  them  we 
finde  (in  many  places)  very  many  true  visible  christians,  with  whom 
we  cannot  (as  we  believe)  deny  publike  communion  absolutely,  and 
therefore  on  occasion  we  offer  to  communicate  with  our  sayd  publike 
congregations  (or  parishes)...^ 

Jacob  may  have  readopted  the  above  sensible  view  of  the 
number  of  church  officers  required  by  a  congregation  after 
meditation  on  the  criticism  of  such  men  as  Matthew  Sutcliffe, 
who  as  early  as  1590  aptly  remarked  concerning  the  Puritan 
preachers :  "  can  they  all  of  them  declare,  how  beside  two 
pastors  and  one  doctor,  a  fraternitie  of  elders  and  deacons 
may  be  mainteined  in  euery  parish  V'^  It  was  probably  the 
difficulty  of  properly  supporting  more  than  one  principal  church 
officer  that  in  time  led  to  the  abolition  of  Doctors  or  Teachers 
among  the  Congregational  Puritan  churches  both  in  England 
and  in  America. 

When  Jacob's  congregation  was  organized  at  London  in 
1616,  it  will  be  remembered  that  one  of  those  whose  advice 
was  sought  concerning  its  organization,  was  a  Puritan  preacher 
named  Richard  Mansell,  or  Maunsell.  He  appears  to  have  been 
in  favour  of  the  church  when  it  was  instituted,  but  in  1619  we 
find  that  he  had  become  Jacob's  most  dangerous  opponent,  and 
in  that  year  Sabine  Staresmore,  one  of  the  leaders  in  the 
organization  of  the  congregation,  published  against  Maunsell 
a  work,  already  mentioned  in  another  chapter,  entitled, 
"THE  I  VNLAWFVLNES  |  OF  READING  IN  |  PRAYER.  | 
OR,  I  THE  ANSWER  OF  Mr.  Ri-|  chard  Mavnsel 
PREACHER,  I  ...",  1619,  8°,  pp.  viii,  48. 

From  this  we  learn  that  Jacob's  church  accounted  the 
Barrowists  as  "  brethren  in  the  common  faith  ",  and  gave  "  the 

1  ^^Anno  Domini  1616.  A  Confession  and  Protestation...",  sig.  D5 
recto  and  verso. 

2  In  his  "A  Treatise  of  Ecclesiasticall  Discipline :...",  London,  1590, 
p.  103. 


318  Early  English  Dissenters 

members  of  their  Churches "  communion^ ;  that  formerly 
Maunsell  had  strongly  recommended  John  Robinson's  congre- 
gation at  Leyden  to  some  who  were  fleeing  to  Holland,  but 
that  later  he  quite  changed  his  attitude.  With  the  lapse  of 
time  Maunsell  had  evidently  become  much  opposed  to  the 
"  matter  of  prophesie ",  and,  says  Staresmore,  had  "  taken 
occasion  to  disgrace  not  onely  all  our  brethren,  but  also  our 
teacher  himselfe,  whereby  his  ministery  to  some  is  made  un- 
profitable, and  divers  of  the  brethren  are  of  late  so  shaken  by 
you  [Maunsell],  that  I  feare  their  sincerities,  and  some  have 
also  turned  back  upon  us,  yea  head  against  us :  which  damage 
I  know  not  how  you  [he]  can  possibly  recompence.  You  were 
[He  was]  once  a  help  to  the  building  of  Gods  house,  but  now 
behold  your  [his]  endevours  are  to  pull  down  and  destroy ;  so 
that  of  a  loving  friend  you  are  [he  is]  become  the  most 
dangerous  and  bitter  opposite  this  poore  Church  hath  met 
with :  for  had  you  [he]  been  an  enemy,  we  could  have  hid 
our  selves  from  you  [him] :  but  since  you  were  [he  was]  our 
familiar  friend,  of  whom  we  took  counsell  for  our  guidance  to 
the  house  of  God,  your  [his]  retirings  are  the  more  dangerous, 
and  your  [his]  speeches  against  us  the  more  pernitious ;  especially 
to  unstable  men  that  are  not  grounded  in  the  truth,  which  are 
ready  to  be  caried  away  with  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the 
deceits  of  men,... "'^ 

The  second  source  used  in  the  compilation  of  the  Jessey 
Memoranda,  which  begins  with  the  year  1622  and  ends  with  the 
year  1639,  is  particularly  aggravating,  because  it  contains  im- 
portant details  which  are  so  lacking  in  clearness  as  to  be  almost 
unintelligible.  Thus  in  1620  Jacob's  church  appears  to  have 
had  additions  of  several  persons  who  came  from  Colchester,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  "an  old  Church  of  the  Separation  was 
there  ",  meaning  probably  that  of  John  Wilkinson.  Those 
who  left  Colchester  were  probably  not  real  separatists,  but  only 
Independent  Puritans,  and  that  may  explain  why  they  were  not 
satisfied  to  remain  there.     Their  names,  so  far  as  they  have 

^  This  report,  of  course,  comes  from  Jacob's,  not  from  the  Barrowist, 
side.     See,  however,  p.  314  above,  text  and  note  2. 
«  P.  47. 


Henry  Jacob's  Congregation  in  London    319 

come  down  to  us,  were  Joshua  Warren,  Henry  January, 
St[ephen?]  Puckle,  Manasses  Kenton,  Lemuel  Tuke,  and  others. 
These  later  by  consent  of  Jacob's  church  became  a  separate, 
and  possibly  a  separatist,  congregation.  Tuke  went  with  them, 
but  perhaps  becoming  dissatisfied  with  any  tendencies  towards 
separatism,  left  them,  and  about  1640  is  said  to  have  been 
a  [Puritan]  preacher  at  Dry. 

"About  eight  Years",  runs  the  record,  "H.  Jacob  was  Pastor 
of  the  said  Church  [in  London,  during  which  time  "much  trouble 
attended  that  State  &  People,  within  &  without"]  &  when 
upon  his  importunity  to  go  to  Virginia,  to  which  he  had  been 
engaged  before  by  their  consent,  he  was  remitted  from  his  said 
office,  &  dismissed  the  Congregation  [in  "  1624  "]  to  go  thither, 
wherein  after  [blank]  Years  he  ended  his  Dayes".  There 
has  been  a  persistent  tradition  that  Jacob  went  to  Virginia. 
Anthony  k  Wood  knew  of  it,  and  in  his  "  Athenae  Oxonienses  " 
mentions  Jacob's  journeying  thither.  The  writer  of  the  article 
on  Jacob  in  the  "Dictionary  of  National  Biography"  has  re- 
peated Wood's  assertion,  and  closes  with  these  notable  words : — 

In  order  to  disseminate  his  views  among  the  colonists  of  Virginia, 
he  removed  thither  with  some  of  his  children  in  October  1622,  and 
formed  a  settlement,  which  was  named  after  him  '  Jacobopolis '. 
He  died  in  April  or  May  1624  in  the  parish  of  St  Andrew 
Hubbard,  London. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  Jessey  Memoranda  and  Wood 
concur  in  the  statement  that  Jacob  went  to  Virginia,  but 
further  particulars  on  which  we  can  rely  concerning  the  latter 
part  of  his  life,  are  almost  entirely  wanting.  After  some 
critical  study  of  the  subject  it  seems  to  me  probable  that  this 
journey  took  place  in  1622,  but  that  Jacob  died  in  Virginia  in 
April  or  May,  1624.  It  should  be  added  here  that  the  part  of 
the  Jessey  Memoranda  which  relates  to  this  matter  appears  to 
have  been  written  about  1641  or  later,  and  that  Jessey  pro- 
bably never  knew  Jacob  and  evidently  had  to  rely  entirely  on 
tradition  for  the  information  he  gives  about  him.  In  any  good 
tradition,  however,  there  is  almost  certain  to  be  a  kernel  of  truth, 
and  I  believe  there  is  in  this.  But  what  is  to  be  said  of  the 
settlement  which  Jacob  is  definitely  stated  to  have  founded 


320  Early  English  Dissenters 

called  "  Jacobopolis  "  in  Virginia,  or  city  of  the  faithful  ?  Perhaps 
some  one  will  suggest  that  it  was  actually  established  but 
dwindled  away  after  Jacob's  death.  Before  deciding  the  point, 
however,  let  us  first  examine  this  name  "Jacobopolis".  Is  it 
not  manifestly  a  compound  of  Jacobus  =  James  and  polis  =  city, 
in  popular  language  Jamestown,  a  city  founded  in  Virginia  in 
1607,  and  which  in  1907  was  celebrating  its  Tercentenary  ? 
This  is  certainly  a  blunder  on  the  pages  of  the  "  Dictionary  of 
National  Biography "  which  ought  to  be  remedied.  But  is  it 
a  fact  that  Jamestown  was  ever  known  as  Jacobopolis?  In 
answer  we  turn  to  Michael  Antonius  Baudrand's  enlarged  edition 
of  Philippus  Ferrarius'  "  Lexicon  Geographicvm  ",  published  at 
Paris  in  1670,  in  which  the  following  entry  occurs: — "[lacohi- 
polis,  lamestowne,  urbs  Americce  septentrionalis,  in  Virginia,  ab 
Anglis  excitata,  c&  sic  dicta  d  lacobo  Rege  magnce  BritannicB, 
juxta  fluvium  Pouvatanium,  aliquot  milliaribus  d  mari  remota.y^ 
We  may,  therefore,  certainly  conclude  that  Henry  Jacob  did  not 
found  a  "Jacobopolis"  in  Virginia,  and  that  if  he  ever  lived  in 
a  locality  of  that  name,  it  was  probably  historic  Jamestown  ! 

After  Jacob's  departure  the  congregation  managed  as  best 
it  could  without  a  pastor  until  about  1624,  when  John  Lathrop^ 
who  had  formerly  been  a  Puritan  preacher  at  Cheriton^  in 
Kent,  and  who  evidently  was  still  an  Independent  Puritan, 
joined  the  church.  He  was  chosen  pastor  in  1625,  and  is  said 
to  have  been  "  a  Man  of  a  tender  heart  and  a  humble  and  meek 
Spirit".  In  1630  it  was  urged  upon  Lathrop's  congregation  to 
separate  from  the  Church  of  England.  Up  to  this  time  it 
seems  probable  that  both  Independent  Puritans  and  separatists 
had  mingled  in  peaceful  union  in  this  church,  but  the  matter 
of  separation  was  now  specially  forced  upon  their  attention 

1  P.  365.  A  similar  view  has  been  independently  expressed  by 
Dr  W.  T.  Whitley  ("Transactions  of  the  Baptist  Historical  Society"  for 
January,  1910,  pp.  212-13,  notes  9  and  10). 

2  In  Rawl.  MS.  A.  128,  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  which  consists  partly 
of  reports  of  cases  tried  in  the  Court  of  High  Commission,  it  is  hinted 
under  the  date,  May  3,  1632,  that  Lathrop  had  been  "Doctor  King  the 
Bishop  of  Londons  Sizer  in  Oxford " ! 

3  Henry  Jacob  is  also  said  to  have  been  settled  at  Cheriton  some  time 
before  1603,— a  point  worth  noticing. 


Henry  Jacob's  Congregation  in  London    321 

owing  to  the  fact  that  some  one  associated  with  the  congre- 
gation, possibly  Sabine  Staresmore,  had  had  his  child  baptized 
in  a  pariah  church  during  that  year.  About  this  time  separatism 
was  gaining  ground  in  London,  and  John  Canne,  who  had  been 
pastor  of  Mr  Hubbard's  church,  and  Avas  about  to  sail  to 
Holland,  sought  to  persuade  Lathrop's  congregation  also  to 
become  separatist,  and  in  renewing  their  covenant  to  renounce 
the  Church  of  England.  Samuel  Howe,  who  had  been  one 
of  Lathrop's  followers,  but  who  had  now  taken  Cannes  place 
as  pastor  of  his  separatist  church  in  London,  as  well  as 
Canne,  would  then  have  communion  with  them.  Mr  Dupper 
especially  approved  of  this  separatist  attitude,  and  requested 
the  congregation  "  to  Detest  &  Protest  against  the  Parish 
Churches  ",  but  the  church  as  a  whole  declined  to  be  tied  by 
covenant  to  declare  that  the  parish  churches  either  were,  or 
were  not,  true  churches,  for  they  said  they  did  not  know  "  what 
in  time  to  come  God  might  further  manifest  to  them  there- 
about[.]  Yet  for  peace  sake  all  Yelded  to  renew  their  Covenant 
in  these  Words 

"To  walke  togeather  in  all  the  Ways  of  God  so  farr  as  he 
hath  made  known  to  Us,  or  shall  make  known  to  us,  &  to  forsake 
all  false  Ways,  &  to  this  the  several  Members  subscribed  their 
hands". 

It  was  apparently  after  this  decision  in  1630  that  Mr  Dupper 
and  Thomas  Dyer  joined  with  Daniel  Chidley  the  elder,  and 
some  others  in  organizing  a  separatist  congi-egation.  Still 
others  united  with  them,  as  Mr  Boy,  Mr  Stanmore  [?  could  this 
be  Staismore],  Benjamin  Wilkins,  Hugh  Vesse,  John  Flower, 
Brother  and  Mrs  Morton  [?  a  son  of  John  Murton,  and  his 
wife],  and  John  Jerrow. 

On  Sunday,  April  29,  1632,  Tomlinson,  the  Pursuivant  of 
the  Bishop  of  London,  captured  about  forty-two  of  the  church 
members  in  the  house  of  Humphrey  Barnet,  a  brewer's  clerk  in 
"Black  Fryers"^     Barnet  was  not  then  a  member  of  the  con- 

1  Rawlinsdn  MS.  A.  128  in  the  Bodleian  Library  gives  extensive  reports 
relating  to  the  appearance  of  members  of  Lathrop's  congregation,  taken 
captive  on  April  29,  1632,  before  the  Court  of  High  Commission  on  May  3, 
8,  and  June  7,  etc.,  in  that  year.     These  reports  may  be  seen  in  full  in 

B.  21 


322 


Early  English  Disseriters 


gregation  and  was  out  of  the  house  at  the  time,  while  eighteen 
members  either  escaped  or  were  not  present.  "  Some  were  not 
committed,  as  Mrs.  Bamet,  Mr.  Lathrop,  W.  Parker,  Mrs.  Allen 
&c.     Several  were  committed  to  the  Bishops  Prison  called  then 

the  New  Prison  (in Crow  a  merchants  house  again)  &  thence 

some  to  the  Clink,  some  to  the  Gate  House,  &  some  that  thought 
to  have  escaped  he  joyned  to  them,  being  in  Prison  togeather  viz" 


John  Lathrop  [Lathorp] 
Samuel  Howes  [House] 
John  Woddin  [Wodwin] 
William  Granger 
[Sara  ?]  Barbone 
Mr  Sergeant 
Pennina  Howes 
^  ,      [Melbome 

(Milburn 
Henry  Parker 
[Mrs  Sara  ?]  Jacob 


Elizabeth 


Joane  Feme,  widow 
Brother  Arnold 
Marke  Lucar 
[Sara  ?]  Jones 

(Milburn 

[Melborne 
Samuel  How 
[Phillis  ?]  Wilson 
Ralfe  Grafton 

Henry  Dod,  deceased  a  Prisoner 
[Abigal  Delamar] 


S.  R  Gardiner's  "Reports  of  Cases  in  the  Courts  of  Star  Chamber  and 
High  Commission",  Camden  Society,  1886,  pp.  278-80,  281,  284-86, 
292-95,  300-2,  307,  308-10,  315.  The  names  of  the  prisoners  here  given 
are  important  since  they  have  enabled  us,  as  indicated  above  in  the  text, 
to  correct  some  of  the  mistakes  in  the  names  found  in  the  Jessey 
Memoranda,  as  well  as  to  add  some  names  to  the  list.  From  the  High 
Commission  reports  the  following  names  have  been  collected  : — 
Thomas    Arundell    of    St    Olave's      John  Ireland  of  "Mary  Maudlins 


parish. 
William  Attwood. 
Sara  Barbon. 

Humphrey  Barnett,  or  Bernard. 
Abigal  Delamar. 
Elizabeth  Denne. 
Henry  Dod. 
Samuel  Eaton. 
John  Egge. 
Joane  Feme. 
Ralfe  Grafton  "an  Vpholster  dwell- 

inge  in  Cornehill",  London. 
"William  Granger  of  "  St.  Margar- 

ettes"  in  Westminster. 
Samuel  How. 
Pennina  Howse,  or  Howes. 


Church  ",  Surrey. 
Sara    Jacob    [undoubtedly    Henry 

Jacob's  widow]. 
Sara  Jones  of  Lambeth. 
John  Latroppe  their  minister. 
Marke  Lucar  of  no  parish. 
Elizabeth  Melborne. 
Mabell  Milborne. 
Henry  Packer  [Parker]. 
William  Pickering. 
Robert  Reignoldes  of  Thistleworth. 
Elizabeth  Sargeant. 
Toby  Talbot. 
Susan  Wilson. 
John  Woodwyne. 


Henry  Jacob's  Congregation  in  London    323 

On  Sunday,  May  12  of  the  same  year,  twenty-six  members 
were  captured  and  committed  to  prison,  and  on  May  26,  just  a 
fortnight  after,  the  "  Antient  Church  "  of  Barrowe,  Greenwood, 
Johnson,  and  Lee  was  surprised,  and  two  of  its  members  were 
committed  as  their  fellow-prisoners.  Thus  for  about  two  years 
they  gained  "  experience  ",  some  being  only  under  bail,  some 
"in  Hold". 

The  prison  experiences  of  Lathrop's  followers  during  these 
two  years  are  summarized  as  follows : — 

1.  In  that  time  the  Lord  opened  their  mouths  so  to  speak  at  the 
[Court  of]  High  Commission  (fe  Pauls  k  in  private  even  the  weake 
Women  as  their  Subtill  &  malicious  Adversarys  were  not  able  to 
resist  but  were  ashamed. 

2.  In  this  Space  the  Lord  gave  them  so  great  faviour  in  the  Eyes 
of  their  Keepers  that  they  suffered  any  friends  to  come  to  them  and 
they  edifyed  &  comforted  one  another  on  the  Lords  Days,  breaking 
bread  (fee. 

3.  By  their  Holy  &  Gratious  carriage  in  their  Sufferings,  he  so 
convinced  others  that  they  obtained  much  more  faviour  in  the  Eyes 
of  all  Such  generally  as  feared  God  then  formerly,  so  that  many 
were  very  kind  &  helpfull  to  them,  contributing  to  their  Necessities, 
some  weekly  sending  Meat  &c.  to  them. 

4.  Their  Keepers  found  [them]  so  sure  in  their  promises  that  they 
had  freedom  to  go  home,  or  about  their  Trades,  or  buisness  whensoever 
they  desired,  &  [the  keepers  having?]  set  their  time,  k  [they 
having  ?]  sayd  they  would  then  returne,  it  was  enough  without  the 
charges  of  one  to  attend  them, 

5.  In  this  very  time  of  their  restraint  the  "Word  was  so  farr  from 
[being]  bound  [i.e.,  kept  from  the  people],  &  the  Saints  so  farr  from 
being  scared  from  the  Ways  of  God  that  even  then  many  were  in 
Prison  added  to  the  Church,  viz. 

John  Ravenscroft  William  [blank] 

Widdow  Harvey  Thomas  \  tt 

Mary  Atkin  Jane      / 

Thomas  Wilson  Widdow  White. 

Sara Ailce  [Alice]  | 

Humphrey  Bernard  Elizabeth        VWincop. 

[Barnet]  Rebecca  ) 

G.  Wiffield 

6.  Not  one  of  those  that  were  taken  did  recant  or  turne  back  from 
the  truth  through  fear  or  through  flattery  or  cunning  slights,  but 
all  were  the  more  strengthened  thereby. 

21—2 


324  Early  MigUsh  Dissenters 

It  will  be  seen  by  comparing  these  impressions  of  Lathrop's 
company  with  the  reports  of  the  Court  of  High  Commission 
given  in  Rawlinson  MS.  A.  128  in  the  Bodleian  Library*,  that 
the  Jessey  Memoranda  give  on  the  whole  a  very  fair  repre- 
sentation of  the  experiences  of  the  prisoners,  although  the 
Commissioners  certainly  made  some  fun  of  them. 

During  this  period  of  imprisonment  Mrs  Sara  Jones  and 
others  spent  some  time  in  writing.  The  following  manuscripts 
were  produced  by  them,  and  about  the  time  of  the  Common- 
wealth were  probably  still  extant" : — 

1.  "  The  Answers  of  M"  [Sara]  Jones  &  Some  others " 
before  the  Court  of  High  Commission. 

2.  Their  Petitions  to  the  king. 

3.  Mrs  Jones'  "  Grievances  ",  the  manuscript  of  which  v-^as 
given  into  the  hands  of  the  Commissioners  and  read  before  them. 

4.  Mrs  Jones'  "  Cronicle  of  Gods  remarkable  Judgments 
&  dealings  that  Year  [1632]  &c  wonderfull  are  the  Lords 
works  its  meet  he  should  have  all  y®  Praise." 

In  1632,  also,  many  of  Lathrop's  followers  were  manifestly 
not  separatists,  as  appears  in  the  examination  of  Samuel  Eaton 
before  the  Court  of  High  Commission  on  May  3,  1632.  The 
report  reads': — 

Samuell  Eaton  and  two  women  &  a  maid  appeared,  who  were 
demaunded  why  they  were  assembled  in  that  Conventicle  when 
others  were  at  church  ?  Eaton,  we  were  not  assembled  in  contempt 
of  the  Magistrate.  London.  Noe?  it  was  in  contempt  of  the 
church  of  England.  Eaton,  it  was  in  conscience  to  God  (may  it 
please  this  honorable  Court)  and  we  were  kept  from  Church,  for 
we  were  confyned  in  the  house  together  by  those  that  besett  the 
house,  els  divers  would  haue  gone  to  Church  and  manie  came  in 
after  the  sermons  were  done. 

During  1633,  while  a  number  of  Lathrop's  church  were  in 
prison,  the  membership  had  evidently  increased  so  much  as  to 
be  a  real  disadvantage  to  the  welfare  of  the  congregation.     On 

*  These  reports  were  published  by  S.  R.  Gardiner  for  the  Camden 
Society  in  1886,  as  previously  stated  in  a  note. 

2  I  here  follow  the  emendation  of  Dr  Whitley  ("  Transactions  of  the 
Baptist  Historical  Society"  for  January,  1910,  p.  217,  note  16). 

3  Rawl.  MS.  A.  128,  under  the  date  May  3,  1632. 


Henry  Jacob's  Congregation  in  London    325 

September  12  of  this  year,  accordingly,  after  certain  members 
had  expressed  dissatisfaction  with  the  non-separatist  position 
of  the  church,  permission  was  granted  to  them  to  form  a 
separatist  congregation  of  their  own,  of  which  we  shall  hear 
more  later. 

Those  of  Lathrop's  company  who  had  been  imprisoned,  with 
the  exception  of  Lathrop  and  Grafton,  were  all  released  upon 
bail  after  two  years'  confinement.  These  two,  however,  were  to 
be  kept  indefinitely  in  prison.  Consequently  after  the  death  of 
his  wife,  seeing  that  he  could  accomplish  nothing  by  spending 
his  life  as  a  prisoner,  Lathrop  petitioned  that  he  might  be 
relieved  of  the  responsibilities  of  his  office  as  pastor  of  the 
congregation.  This  request  was  granted,  and  about  June, 
1634,  he  was  released  from  prison  to  go  to  New  England. 
He  was  accompanied  by  about  thirty  members,  among  whom 
were, — Samuel  Howse  ;  John  Wodwin  ;  Goodwives  Woodwin, 
elder  and  younger ;  Widow  Norton ;  and  afterwards  Robert 
Linel  and  wife,  Mr  and  Mrs  Laberton,  Mrs  Hammond,  and 
Mrs  Swinerton.  During  the  years  1636-1637  after  Lathrop's 
departure  the  remnant  of  the  congregation  were  somewhat 
troubled  by  persecution,  but  on  the  whole  they  seem  to  have 
lived  in  comparative  peace,  and  in  the  summer  of  1637^ 
Henry  Jessey  became  pastor  in  Lathrop's  place.  In  1638 
some  others  forsook  the  church,  of  whom  we  shall  hear  again 
later. 

Still  further  changes  were  in  store  for  Jessey's  followers, 
as  is  made  plain  in  the  following  statement- : — 

This  Congregation  being  at  this  time  grown  so  numerous  that 
they  could  not  well  meet  together  in  any  one  place,  without  being 
discovered  by  the  Nhnrods  of  the  Earth ;  after  many  consultations 
among  themselves,  and  advice  taken  with  others,  but  especially 
asking  councel  from  above ;  Upon  the  18<A  day  of  the  third  Month 
called  May,  1640.  they  divided  themselves  equally,  and  became  two 
Congregations,  the  one  whereof  continued  with  Mr.  lesseij,  the  other 
joyned  themselves  to  Mr.  Praise  God  Barebone.  each  of  the  Churches 
renewing  their  Covenant  and  choosing  distinct  Officers  of  their  own 
from  among  themselves ; . . . 

1  "The  Life  and  Death  of  Mr.  Henry  lessey",  1671,  p.  9. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  10-11. 


326  Early  English  Dissenters 

With  this  citation  we  may  leave  Jessey's  congregation^, 
though  it  should  be  added,  that  he  and  his  followers  continued 
to  be  persecuted  during  the  years  1638-1641,  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  up  to  the  end  of  this  period  Jessey  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  a  separatist,  but  an  Independent  Puritan. 


2.     The  Rise  of  the  English  Particular  Anabaptists. 

We  may  now  turn  to  the  rise  of  the  English  Particular 
Anabaptists,  who  first  appear  in  a  separatist  church  which 
broke  away  from  Lathrop's  congregation  in  1633.  While  some 
facts  relating  to  the  evolution  of  the  Particular  Anabaptists 
are  given  in  the  Jessey  Memoranda  as  well  as  in  the  Kiffin 
Manuscript,  the  latter  seems  to  have  been  specially  written 
to  trace  the  development  of  the  earliest  English  Particular 
Anabaptist  congregations,  and  on  that  account  is  of  more  value 
for  our  purposes  here. 

Among  those  dismissed  by  Lathrop's  church  on  Sept.  12, 
1633,  whose  names  have  come  down  to  our  time,  were, — 
Mr  and  Mrs  Henry  Parker,  Thomas  Shepard,  Samuel  Eaton, 
Marke  Lucar  or  Luker,  Mr  Wilson,  Joane  Feme,  widow,  Mary 
or  Mabel  Milbum  or  Milborne,  John  Milburn,  one  Arnold, 
Thomas  Allen,  one  Hatmaker,  and  probably  two  or  three 
others.  "  To  these  "  in  the  same  year  "  loyned  Richard  Blunt, 
Thomas  Hubert,  Richard  Tredwell  &  his  Wife  Katherine,  lohn 
Trimber,  William  Jennings,  &  Samuel  Eaton,  Mary  Greenway 

Mr.  Eaton  with  some  others  receiving  a  further  Baptism  " 

evidently   administered    by   sprinkling ^      Eaton    and    "  some 

1  Between  1636  and  1641  the  following  members  among  others  appear 
to  have  been  added :  —lohn  Trash,  Mr  Glover,  Mr  Eldred,  R.  [?  Br.]  Smith, 
Sister  Dry,  Br.  Russell,  Br.  Cradock,  Mrs  Lovel,  Mrs  Chitwood,  Br. 
Golding,  lohn  Stoneard,  Mr  Shambrook,  Sister  Nowel,  Mr  Nowel,  and 
Mrs  Berry.  Mr  Brown  and  Mr  Puckle  should  perhaps  be  included  in 
this  number. 

2  On  Jan.  11, 1635/36,  one  Francis  Jones,  of  RatcliflF,  Middlesex,  basket- 
maker,  was  accused  before  the  Court  of  High  Commission  of  being  accus- 
tomed to  keep  "private  conventicles  and  exercises  of  religion",  and  of 
being  an  Anabaptist.  He  admitted  that  he  had  been  rebaptized.  He 
"  was  committed  to  Newgate "   ("  Calendar  of  State   Papers,  Domestic 


Rise  of  the  English  Particular  Anabaptists    327 

others  ",  therefore,  were  "  Anabaptists  ",  while  the  rest  of  the 
congregation  were  not.  In  other  words,  this  new  church  was 
a  mixed  separatist  congregation  composed  partly  of  Paedo- 
baptists  and  partly  of  Antipaedobaptists.  "  Others  joyned  to 
them",  we  are  told,  and  about  1638,  but  certainly  not  earlier, 
William  Kiffin  became  a  member. 

Some  time  in  the  spring  of  1638  still  others  in  Lathrop's, 
now  Jessey's,  church,  who  had  become  convinced  that  baptism 
should  not  be  administered  to  infants,  but  only  to  professed 
believers,  deserted  the  congregation  and  joined  with  John  Spils- 
bury  who  seems  to  have  become  pastor  of  Eaton's  mixed  church. 
Later,  the  deserters  requested  that  Jessey  should  not  censure 
them  for  their  too  hasty  action,  and  their  wish  was  granted  on 
June  8,  1638.  The  following  are  reported  to  have  been  the 
names  of  those  who  made  this  application, — Mr  Peti  [?  John^] 
Fenner,  Henry  Pen,  Thomas  Wilson,  William  Batty  or  Battee, 
Mrs  Allen  who  died  in  1639,  and  Mrs  Norwoods 

Eight  women  of  Spilsbury's  church  were  apparently  taken 
prisoners  not  long  before  April  23,  1640,  and  on  that  date  were 
brought  before  the  Court  of  High  Commission.  Their  names 
were  Magdalen  Spilsbury  (probably  the  wife  of  John  Spilsbury), 
Anne  Pawle,  Grace  Dicks,  Catherine  Tredwell,  Mary  Evans, 
Anne  Dunkley,  Anne  Goring,  and  Anne  Gell.  Their  case  was 
handed  over  "to  the  secular  power  of  quarter  sessions",  as  "these 
were  poor  women,  schismatics,  lately  taken  at  a  conventicle  "^ 

Series,  of  the  Reign  of  Charles  I.  1635-1636",  London,  1866,  p.  468).  It 
would  be  interesting  to  know  whether  Francis  Jones  was  in  any  way 
connected  with  this  London  congregation  of  Particular  Anabaptists,  and 
also  whether  he  was  related  to  Mrs  Sara  Jones  who  was  a  member  of 
Lathrop's  congregation  and  appeared  before  the  Court  of  High  Commission 
in  1632. 

1  See  the  "Transactions  of  the  Baptist  Historical  Society"  for  January, 
1910,  p.  231,  note  3. 

2  The  Kiffin  Manuscript  mentions  a  Mr  Pen  besides  H.  Pen,  but  like 
the  Jessey  Memoranda  makes  the  total  number  of  applicants  six. 
Probably  Kiffin  made  a  mistake  in  inserting  the  name  "Pen"  twice. 
A  "Mr.  Wilson"  and  Thomas  Allen  were  among  the  original  members 
of  this  church  in  1633. 

^  "Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,...  1640",  London,  1880, 
p.  406. 


328  Early  English  Dissenters 

Concerning  one  of  the  characters  with  whom  we  are  now 
concerned,  namely  Samuel  Eaton,  there  has  been  more  or  less 
conjecture.  For  instance,  Dr  George  A.  Lofton^  speaks  of 
Eaton  as  if  he  were  alive  in  1641,  and  even  Dr  Dexter,  I 
think,  has  somewhere  queried  whether  this  same  Samuel 
Eaton  was  not  later  the  pastor  of  the  Congregational  Church 
in  Duckinfield.  There  is  a  passage  in  a  pamphlet  entitled, 
"The  Brownists  Conventicle",  1641,  which  seems  to  clear  up 
the  difficulty.  From  this  work  it  seems  that  there  had  been 
two  Samuel  Eatons  in  England  about  this  time.  The  first 
was  the  separatist  who  had  evidently  died  before  1641,  and 
the  second  was  the  Independent  Puritan  who  was  still  living. 
The  first  is  called  "  Eaton,  the  famous  Button-maker  in  Saint 
Martins".    The  second  is  spoken  of  more  at  length  as  follows'^ : — 

And  now  of  late  lest  these  supermysticall  Sectists  should  be 
wanting  in  the  Land,  there  is  lately  come  over  from  New  England, 
as  from  a  New  Hierusalem,  one  Samuel  Eaton  a  Minister,  who 
preached  at  Saint  lohns  Church  in  Chester,  that  the  very  names  of 
Parsons  and  Yicars  were  Antichristian,  that  Pastours  and  Teachers 
of  particular  Congregations,  must  be  chosen  by  the  people, . . . 

These  statements  agree  well  with  facts  which  prove  beyond 
doubt  that  the  separatist  Samuel  Eaton  was  not  the  Indepen- 
dent Puritan  of  the  same  name^  In  the  first  place,  in  the  Public 
Record  Office  is  a  paper^  giving  a  description  of  the  funeral  of 
the  separatist  Samuel  Eaton  on  Aug.  25,  1639,  a  copy  of  which 
may  be  found  in  the  volume  of  documents ;  and  in  the  second 
place,  there  is  a  passage  in  the  fourth  volume  of  the  publications 
of  the  Chetham  Society,  published  in  1845^  which  shows  that 
Samuel  Eaton  of  Duckinfield  was  the  son  of  Mr  Richard  Eaton, 
Vicar  of  Great  Budsworth,  Cheshire,  and  that  on  returning  from 
New  England  at  the  beginning  of  the  Civil  Wars  he  gathered  a 
[Congregational  Puritan]  church  at  Duckinfield  in  the  Cheshire 

1  "English  Baptist  Reformation",  Louisville,  Kentucky,  1899,  p.  150. 

2  [P.  3.] 

3  Since  the  above  account  was  written  Dr  Whitley  has  independently 
reached  a  similar  conclusion  ("  Transactions  of  the  Baptist  Historical 
Society"  for  January,  1910,  p.  221,  note). 

4  S.  P.,  Dom.,  Charles  I,  Vol.  427  (No.  107). 
6  P.  61  and  note. 


Rise  of  the  English  Particular  Anabaptists    329 

parish  of  Stockport.  He  had  much  trouble  with  the  Presbyterian 
Puritans  (now  usually  termed  Presbyterians)  and  died  in  1664. 

With  these  facts  before  us,  we  may  turn  to  what  is  known 
of  the  Brownist-Anabaptist,  Samuel  Eaton  after  1633.  From 
the  Acts  of  the  Court  of  High  Commission  he  appears  to 
have  been  taken  prisoner  again  on  or  before  May  5,  1636,  on 
which  date  he  was  referred  to  the  Commissioners.  He  is  called 
a  button-maker  of  St  Giles's  without  Cripplegate,  London.  In 
1638,  not  1633  as  given  by  Dr  Waddington,  he  was  in  New- 
gate, committed  by  Archbishop  Laud  "  for  a  Schismaticall  and 
dangerous  Fellowe  ".  He  is  reported  by  Frauncis  Tucker,  B.D,, 
to  have  held  "  diverse  Conventicles  in  the  said  Gaole  ",  at  which 
seventy  or  even  more  persons  had  been  present  with  permission 
of  the  prison  keeper,  and  often  to  have  affirmed  in  his  sermons 
that  "  Baptisme  [probably  meaning,  as  administered  to  infants 
in  the  Church  of  England]  was  the  Doctrine  of  Devills"^  It 
appears  that  the  prison  keeper  was  so  much  of  a  friend  to  Eaton, 
that  he  allowed  him  sometimes  to  leave  the  prison  in  order  to 
preach  at  meetings  for  which  he  had  arranged,  and  when  Mr 
Tucker  expressed  surprise  that  a  schismatic  should  be  so  hand- 
somely treated,  the  keeper  solemnly  told  him  that  he  "  had  a 
strict  Charge  from  the  highe  Commission  to  haue  a  speciall 
Care  of  the  said  Eaton  &c  ".  Very  natural  instructions  these, 
to  be  sure,  but  what  a  novel  interpretation  for  a  prison  keeper 
in  those  dangerous  times  to  have  given  to  them ! 

How  long  Eaton  received  such  favours  we  are  not  told,  but 
he  died  in  prison  just  before  Aug.  31,  1639.  We  also  do  not 
know  what  caused  his  death.  Probably  he  was  more  closely 
confined  after  Tucker  had  complained  to  the  Archbishop. 
Some  one  saw  Eaton's  funeral  procession,  and  out  of  curiosity 
followed  the  body  to  the  grave  "  in  the  new  Church  yard  neere 
Bethelem  ".  His  popularity  is  attested  by  the  fact  that  at  least 
two  hundred  Brownists  and  Anabaptists  are  said  to  have  been 
in  the  funeral  procession.  When  they  reached  the  churchyard 
"  they  like  so  many  Bedlams  cast  the  corpes  in ;  &  with  their 
feet,  in  stead  of  spades  cast  &  thrust  in  the  mould  till  the  grave 
was  allmost  full :  then  they  paid  the  grave  maker  for  his  paines, 
»  S.  P.,  Doiu.,  Charles  I,  Vol.  406  (No.  64). 


330  Early  English  Dissenters 

who  told  them  that  he  must  fetch  a  minister,  but  they  said,  he 
might  spare  his  labour."  This  is  evidently  a  good  illustration 
of  the  way  in  which  the  separatists  were  obliged  to  act  under 
the  trying  conditions  imposed  upon  them  by  unsympathetic 
Church  and  State  officials. 

In  the  Kiffin  Manuscript  under  the  date  1640,  between  the 
names,  "M""  H.  lessey"  and  "M''  Richard  Blunt",  there  is 
manifestly  a  break  in  the  text.  This  defect  may  have  been 
caused  by  an  imperfection  in  the  original  document,  or  it  may 
be  due  to  a  lack  of  care  taken,  or  to  some  mistake  made,  by 
Stinton  while  originally  copying  his  historical  sources  into  the 
"Repository"^,  or  finally  to  the  unintentional  omission  of  a 
portion  of  Stinton's  copy  made  during  the  transcription  of  the 
"Repository"  into  the  Gould  Manuscript.  In  1640,  as  the 
Kiffin  Manuscript  now  reads,  Henry  Jessey  and  Richard  Blunt 
would  appear  to  have  been  convinced  together  of  the  truth  of 
believers',  or  adult,  baptism  by  immersion.  We  know,  however, 
from  document  No.  4  in  the  Gould  transcript,  that  Jessey  was 
not  so  convinced  until  June,  1645.  Hence  we  must  infer  that 
at  least  some  words  are  missing  at  this  point.  Fortunately  the 
most  important  facts  do  not  seem  to  be  lost. 

As  nearly  as  I  can  judge,  the  narrative  should  here  continue 
somewhat  in  this  way. — During  1640  Richard  Blunt  and  certain 
other  members  of  Spilsbury's,  and  perhaps  a  few  of  Jessey 's, 
church,  became  convinced  that  baptism  by  sprinkling  or  pouring, 
whether  administered  to  believers  or  adults,  or  to  infants,  was  not 
the  form  of  baptism  employed  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  but  that 
true  baptism  "  ought  to  be  by  diping  the  Body  into  the  Water, 
resembling  Burial  &  riseing  again  ".  "  Sober  conferance  "  was 
accordingly  held  over  this  new  matter  which  had  been  brought 
to  their  attention,  but  Spilsbury,  the  pastor,  was  evidently  not 
convinced  at  this  time  of  the  position  taken  by  Blunt.  There- 
upon, those  who  favoured  the  administration  of  baptism  by 
dipping  or  immersion  conferred  among  themselves  as  to  what 
should  be  done.  For  one  thing,  they  seem  to  have  determined 
to  separate  from  Spilsbury  and  to  meet  together  in  two  com- 
panies. They  also  appear  to  have  realized  the  difficulty  before 
'  This  second  alternative  seems  to  me  the  most  probable. 


Rise  of  the  English  Particular  Anabaptists    331 

them  in  the  fact  that  immersion  had  been  so  long  in  disuse  in 
England,  for  to  whom  should  they  go  for  this  new  baptism  by 
"  dipping  "  which  they  held  to  be  necessary  for  their  salvation, 
"none  haveing  then  [in  1640]  so  so  practised ^  in  England  to 
professed  Believers"*? 

Hearing,  however,  that  some  in  the  Netherlands,  namely 
the  Rynsburgers  or  CoUegiants,  practised  immersion,  they 
sent  over  to   them  "Richard  Blunt  (who  understood  Dutch) 

1  As  is  well  known,  by  1600  the  administration  of  baptism  by  dipping 
or  immersion  had  been  practically  discontinued  in  the  Church  of  England. 
However,  in  hterature  mention  was  occasionally  made  of  dipping  as  being 
the  proper  form  of  baptism,  though  it  does  not  seem  to  have  been  pressed 
as  the  only  form  until  about  1635.  Henry  Jacob,  it  is  true,  in  one  of  his 
pamphlets,  as  has  already  been  mentioned,  alludes  to  dipping  as  the  correct 
form  of  baptism,  but  he  is,  of  course,  referring  to  the  immersion  of  infants 
and  not  of  grown  people,  nor  does  he  emphasize  the  point. 

It  appears  from  Giles  Widdoes'  "  Schismatical  Pvritan  ",  Oxford,  1631 
[p.  21],  that  as  early  as  that  date  there  were  some  in  England  who  admin- 
istered baptism  "  in  Wells,  in  Brookes,  in  Rivers,  &c.  to  defend,  to  vphold 
a  factious  spirit ".  These  offenders  were  probably  Puritans  in  the  Church 
of  England,  and  the  subjects  of  baptism  in  such  cases  must  have  been 
infants,  while  the  form  of  baptism  employed  may  have  been  sprinkling  or 
pouring.  The  fault  that  was  found  with  those  who  so  administered 
baptism  in  1631,  was  that  they  did  not  baptize  in  the  font,  which  "  is  the 
commanded  place  for  baptisme  ",  not  because  they  administered  a  second 
baptism,  or  employed  immersion.  These  irregular  baptisms  were  evidently 
administered  in  a  river,  well,  or  brook  in  the  same  manner  in  which  they 
would  have  been  in  the  font. 

In  1635  Daniel  Rogers  in  "A  Treatise  of  the  two  Sacraments",  made 
a  strong  plea  for  the  use  of  baptism  by  dipping  in  the  Church  of  England. 
His  view  as  expressed  on  pages  70-1  may  even  have  made  some  impression 
upon  the  English  Particular  Anabaptists,  who  first  began  to  employ 
immersion  about  1641,  while  some  of  the  baptismal  irregularities  which 
appeared  in  early  New  England  were  probably  suggested  by  this  work. 

2  The  writer,  of  course,  means  that  the  people  with  whom  he  associated 
had  never  heard  of  any  English  Anabaptists,  who  had  practised  immersion 
before  1640.  Perhaps  the  name  of  Leonard  Busher  was  quite  unknown  to 
him,  and  though  Busher  certainly  seems  to  have  advocated  the  immersion 
of  believers  in  1614,  yet  it  should  be  i-emembered  that  we  have  no  evidence 
whatever  that  he  was  able  to  put  his  views  into  practice,  nor  do  we  know 
that  he  had  any  followers  in  England  or  in  Holland.  As  has  already 
been  said,  he  appears  to  have  been  in  Holland,  not  in  England,  when  he 
wrote  and  published  his  "  Religions  Peace  ". 


332  Early  English  Dissenters 

with  Letters  of  Commendation  who  was  kindly  accepted 
there,  &   returned  with  Letters  from..,Iohn  Batte  [Batten]^ 

1  In  the  original  record  supposed  to  have  been  written  by  Kifl&n  from 
which  Stinton  copied  this  name  into  his  "Repository",  Batte  was  probably 
spelled  Batte,  i.e.,  Batten,  but  the  line  over  the  "e"  has  been  lost  in  the 
Gould  Manuscript. 

A  quaint  and  instructive,  but  rather  extended,  "  Accomit  of  the  Rise 
and  Progress  of  the  Sect  of  Rynsburgers,  CoUegiants,  or  Prophets  "  is  given 
in  Gerard  Brandt's  "The  History  of  the  Reformation... in  and  about  the 
Low-Countries",  1720-23,  Vol.  iv.,  pp.  49-59.  On  page  53  occurs  the 
following  illuminating  passage,  in  which  ^'- John  Batten  of  Leyden"  is 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  five  leading  Rynsburgers  : — 

"They  [the  Rynsbm-gers]  observed  the  following  method  in  their 
Assembly  :  First,  somebody  among  them  read  several  chapters  out  of  the 
New  Testament ;  then  the  Reader,  or  any  other  person  pray'd  ;  and  after 
the  Prayer,  it  was  asked,  according  to  the  Text  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  26.  Whether 
any  man  in  the  Assembly  had  any  prophecy  or  spiritual  gift  for  the  edifica- 
tion of  the  people  ?  Or  wliether  any  one  had  any  doctrine,  consolation,  or 
exhortation,  that  so  he  might  bring  it  forth.  Sometimes  they  made  use  of 
the  very  words  of  the  aforesaid  Text  of  the  Apostle.  Upon  which  one  or 
other  of  the  company  arose,  and  read  a  Text  or  Sentence  out  of  the  Bible, 
which  he  had  throughly  meditated  on  before  hand,  and  made  a  kind  of 
Sermon,  or  Discourse  upon  it,  which  lasted  sometimes  an  hour,  or  longer. 
This  being  ended,  it  was  asked  again,  whether  any  body  else  had  any 
thing  to  offer  for  the  edification  of  the  Assembly  ?  And  then  up  stood 
another,  who  read  and  spoke  as  before.  This  man  having  done,  asked  the 
same  question  as  the  other  had  done  ;  upon  which  a  third  man  stood  up  : 
Nay,  Paschier  says,  that  he  himself  had  seen  four  of  them  preaching,  or, 
as  they  stiled  it,  prophesying  one  after  another,  and  that  it  lasted  from  the 
evening  till  it  was  full  day,  the  next  morning ;  and  that  some  sate  and 
slejjt  in  the  mean  while  so  heartily,  that  in  the  morning  they  knew  as 
little  of  what  had  been  said  as  the  evening  before.  He  further  says,  that 
the  Speakers  were  commonly  the  same  persons,  though  they  invited,  and 
gave  every  man  free  leave  to  prophesy.  These  Speakers  were  Gilbert 
vander  Kodde,  with  his  Brothers,  John  and  Adrian,  Antony  Cornelison, 
and  John  Batten  of  Leydeti :  And  though  some  others  might  now  and  then 
put  in  a  word,  yet  the  above-mentioned  persons,  or  some  of  them  were 
always  of  the  number  of  the  monthly  ffolders-forth." 

I  have  published  the  whole  of  Brandt's  "  Account "  of  the  Rynsburgers 
with  some  comments  in  "The  Review  and  Expositor",  Louisville,  Kentucky, 
for  October,  1910,  pp.  526-47.  The  article  is  entitled,  "  The  CoUegiants 
or  Rynsburgers  of  Holland  :  Through  whose  Co-operation  the  Members  of 
the  first  Immersionist  English  Anabaptist  Congregation  in  London  Pro- 
cured their  Baptism  in  1641." 


Rise  of  the  English  Particular  Anabajytists    333 

a  Teacher  there,  &  from  that  Church   to  such  as  sent  him 
[Blunt] ". 

This  is  the  story  as  slightly  reconstructed  from  the  Kiffin 
Manuscript.  Is  it  trustworthy  ?  Most  assuredly,  but  before 
considering  that  point,  we  should  notice  that  this  account  does 
not  say  that  Blunt  was  immersed  by  John  Batten,  but  only 
that  he  was  kindly  received  and  returned  with  letters  for  his 
church  in  London,  which  we  may  surmise  contained  with  other 
information  suggestions  as  to  how  the  administration  of  im- 
mersion should  be  commenced  and  conducted  by  the  English 
Particular  Anabaptists ^  There  is,  therefore,  in  this  narrative 
nothing  which  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  believe,  and  even  the 
statement  that  there  were  no  immersionist  Anabaptists  in 
England  before  1640  would  not  have  seemed  remai'kable,  if  it 
had  not  been  so  difficult  in  certain  quarters  to  believe  that 
Thomas  Crosby  could  have  made  a  mistake ! 

The  Kiffin  Manuscript  continues  the  story  by  pointing  out 
that  the  immersionist  Anabaptists,  who  had  been  meeting  in 
two  companies  by  themselves,  intended  so  to  meet  in  the  future. 
On  Blunt's  return  they  evidently  came  together  and  agreed  "  to 
proceed  alike  togeather"  to  organize  an  immersionist  church, 
"  And  then  Manifesting  (not  by  any  formal  Words  a  Covenant) 
which  word  was  scrupled  by  some  of  them,  but  by  mutual 
desires  «Sz;  agreement  each  Testified".  Then,  we  are  told,  the 
two  companies  appointed  "  one  to  Baptize  the  rest :  so  it  was 
solemnly  performed  by  them ".  Next  comes  the  following 
sentence  which  does  not  seem  exactly  to  agree  with  the  pre- 
ceding statement,  but  which  with  it  may  give  a  very  good  idea 
of  certain  particulars  observed  in  this  first  administration  of 
immersion  by  English  Anabaptists : — 

M-"  Blunt  Baptized  M-"  [?  Laur.(eiice)'-]  Blacklook  that  was  a 
Teacher  amongst  them,  &  M'"  Blunt  being  [i.e.,  now  having  been'l] 
Baptized  [by  Blacklock  1],  he  <k  M''  Blacklock  Baptized  the  rest  of 
their  friends  that  were  so  minded,... 

1  This,  in  my  opinioD,  was  the  extent  of  the  Rynsburgers'  co-operation 
with  the  first  congregation  of  English  immersionist  Anabaptists. 

2  The  Gould  transcript  reads  Sam.(uel)  Blacklock  and  may  be  correct, 
but  a  mistake  might  easily  have  been  made  in  copying.  Laurence  Black- 
lock  appears  to  be  rather  better  known  than  Samuel  Blacklock. 


334  Early  English  Dissenters 

From  these  two  statements  we  may  draw  the  following 
description  as  perhaps  in  accord  with  the  intention  of  the 
original  writer. — Some  time  in  1641  Richard  Blunt  was  ap- 
pointed to  begin  the  administration  of  baptism,  since  he  had 
been  in  Holland,  and  had  learned  there  how  immersion  was 
administered  among  the  Rynsburgers,  but  apparently  not  on 
the  ground  that  he  had  been  immersed  by  them.  Their 
practice  of  baptizing  by  dipping  or  plunging  he  now  faithfully 
reproduced  in  England,  where  it  soon  received  the  nickname  of 
"ducking  over  head  and  ears".  Blunt  immersed  Blacklock, 
who  was  evidently  their  leader,  and  Blunt  (having  afterwards 
been  baptized  by  Blacklock^)  together  with  Blacklock  baptized 
the  rest. 

Many  were  now  added  to  the   church,  or  rather   to   the 

1  The  record  itself  is  extremely  obscure  as  to  Blunt's  baptism,  for  it 
does  not  directly  state  that  he  was  immersed  in  Holland,  though  that 
might  be  inferred  ;  nor  can  it  be  maintained  with  certainty  from  the  text 
alone  that  he  was  not  baptized  by  Blacklock.  Accordingly,  if  we  had 
only  this  record  to  fall  back  upon,  we  would  be  left  in  a  hopeless  dilemma, 
but  fortunately  for  other  reasons  we  may  definitely  conclude,  contrary  to 
all  that  has  been  written  on  the  subject  during  the  past  thirty  years,  that 
Blacklock,  and  not  Batten,  baptized  Blunt. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  quite  unthinkable  that  the  Calvinistic,  or 
Particular  Baptist,  Blunt  would  accept  baptism  at  the  hands  of  the 
Arminian  CoUegiants,  any  more  than  John  Smyth  thirty  years  earlier 
would  have  been  baptized  by  the  Mennonites. 

In  the  second  place,  since  it  is  well  known  that  Blunt  did  not  baptize 
himself,  it  is  evident  from  the  following  important  statement  that 
Blacklock  immersed  Blunt : — 

"  He  [Shem  Acher,  i.e.,  Francis  Bampfield]  has  been  credibly  informed 
by  two  yet  alive  in  this  City  of  London,  who  were  Members  of  the 
first  Church  of  Baptized  [i.e.,  immersed]  Believers  here,  that  their  first 
Administrator  [of  immersion]  was  one  who  baptized  himself,  or  else  he  and 
another  baptized  one  another,  and  so  gathered  a  Church  ;  which  was  so 
opposed  in  Publick  and  in  Private,  that  they  were  disputed  out  of  their 
Church-State  and  Constitution,  out  of  their  Call  to  Office  ;  that  not 
being  able  to  justify  their  Principle  and  Practice  by  the  Word,  they  were 
broken  and  scattered."  ("  "tHN  OCT  |  A  NAME,  an  After-one ",  London, 
1681,  p.  16.) 

In  an  article  which  I  have  recently  prepared,  and  shortly  hope  to  have 
published,  this  whole  subject  has  been  much  more  fully  treated  than  here 
seems  advisable. 


Rise  of  the  English  Particular  Anabaptists    336 

two  divisions  of  it,  so  that  its  joint  membership  in  January, 
1641/42,  is  said  to  have  been  fifty-three.  The  first  section  of 
the  congregation  seems  to  have  been  under  the  leadership  of 
Bhint,  the  second  under  that  of  Blacklock.  This  church  as  a 
whole  became  known  later  as  that  of  Blunt,  Emmes,  and 
Wrighter^,  and  in  the  first  column  of  the  list  of  members  in 
January,  1641/42,  the  signatures  of  Richard  Blunt  and  Samuel 
Eames  [Emmes]  appear.  Wrighter  evidently  joined  the  con- 
gregation at  a  later  date  than  January  9.  The  entire  list  of  the 
names  of  the  fifty-three  members  may  be  seen  in  the  volume 
of  documents,  and  may  be  consulted  as  a  natural  conclusion 
to  this  review  of  the  rise  of  the  first  church  of  English  im- 
mersionist  Particular  Anabaptists. 

1  Thomas  Edwards'  "The  third  Part  of  Gangrjena",  London,   1646, 
p.  112. 


APPENDIX   TO   CHAPTER   XIII 

A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION   OF  THE  GOULD 
MANUSCRIPT 

This  appendix  is  a  corrected  and  considerably  abbreviated 
text  of  an  article  published  six  years  ago  in  America  ^  It  is 
repeated  here  because  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the 
preceding  chapter  largely  depends  on  the  truth  of  the  facts 
herein  contained. 

The  reader  is  already  aware  from  what  has  been  said  in  the 
Introduction  to  this  volume,  that  a  discovery  was  made  in  1880 
which  leads  us  to  believe  that  the  English  Anabaptists  began 
only  about  1641  to  practise  immersion.  During  the  past  quarter 
of  a  century  a  very  considerable,  if  not  an  absolutely  exhaustive, 
body  of  evidence  has  been  gathered  in  support  of  the  new  view. 
Since  1896  the  Gould  Manuscript,  prepared  for  the  late  Rev, 
George  Gould  of  Norwich^  in  connection  with  the  "  St.  Mary's 
Norwich  Chapel  Case"  of  1860,  has  been  located  and  carefully 
examined,  and  the  literature  of  the  period  before  and  after 
1641,  also,  has  been  critically  explored.  In  a  word,  before 
1900,  about  everything  possible  had  been  done  to  establish  the 

1  In  "  The  Baptist  Review  and  Expositor ",  Louisville,  Kentucky,  for 
October,  1905,  pp.  445-71. 

2  In  this  connection  a  few  words  concerning  the  Rev.  George  Gould 
may  be  of  interest.  Mr  Gould  was  not  a  university  graduate,  but  the 
"  Introduction "  to  his  book,  "  Open  Communion  and  the  Baptists  of 
Norwich  ",  shows  him  to  have  been  a  man  of  unusual  scholarly  ability  and 
critical  insight,  qualities  nowhere  manifested  more  conspicuously  than  in 
the  transcription  of  the  manuscript  known  by  his  name,  since  this  volume 
has  preserved  for  the  Baptist  denomination  certain  very  important 
documents  which  otherwise  might  have  been  almost  totally  lost. 


An  Examination  of  the  Gould  Manuscrqjt     337 

general  truth  of  the  new  theory  with  the  exception  of  determining 
a  few  points,  one  of  which  concerning  Bhint's  immersion  has  been 
briefly  treated  at  the  close  of  the  preceding  chapter,  and  another 
of  which  up  to  1900  had  apparently  been  beyond  the  range  of 
definite  and  final  solution,  namely,  Who  was  the  original  compiler 
of  the  material  contained  in  the  Gould  transcript  ?  In  an  attempt 
to  settle  this  second  point  and  certain  others  relating  to  it  the 
author  gathered  the  facts  presented  in  the  following  pages. 

In  the  summer  of  1901  the  writer  obtained  his  first  oppor- 
tunity of  examining  the  Gould  Manuscript,  now  in  the  possession 
of  the  Rev.  George  P.  Gould,  M.A.,  Principal  of  Regent's  Park 
College,  London,  and  a  son  of  the  late  Rev.  George  Gould  of 
Norwich.  In  the  autumn  of  1902  a  second  thorough  examina- 
tion was  granted,  as  well  as  the  opportunity  to  inspect  certain 
original  manuscripts,  which  had  been  in  the  possession  of  the 
Rev.  George  Gould,  and  carefully  preserved  by  Principal  Gould, 
but  which  had  apparently  not  been  used  in  recent  times. 

Though  frequent  reference  of  late  has  been  made  to  the 
Gould  Manuscript,  and  its  contents,  the  following  description 
of  it  may  be  given.  It  is  a  good-sized  folio  of  somewhat  over 
four  hundred  pages,  half-bound,  and  contains  transcripts  of  a 
considerable  number  of  documents  pertaining  to  the  history  of 
the  early  English  Baptists.  The  manuscript  begins  with  thirty 
numbered  sections  covering  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight  pages, 
which  are  followed  by  eighteen  pages  of  unnumbered  docu- 
ments, then  by  a  long  section  of  forty- four  pages  which  con- 
tains several  subdivisions  and  bears  the  general  title,  "  Records 
of  the  Barkshire  Association",  and  finally  by  a  short  note  con- 
cerning William  Turner's  "A  preseruatiue "  [1551].  The  work 
of  transcription,  with  the  exception  of  about  a  page  and  a  half 
copied  by  Mr  Gould  himself,  was  entirely  done  by  the  elderly 
Mr  William  Keymer,  a  Master  in  Grey  Friars'  Priory  School, 
Norwich,  who  wrote  a  very  beautiful  hand,  and  whom  Mr  Gould 
could  trust  to  make  a  scrupulousl}'  accurate  copy.  The  volume, 
therefore,  makes  an  excellent  impression  in  general,  but  strange 
to  say,  it  does  not  bear  the  name  of  the  original  compiler,  and 
this  fact  has  been  used  to  disparage  its  historical  value. 

Indeed,  at  first  sight,  the  absence  of  the  compiler's  name 
B.  22 


338  Early  English  Disseiiters 

seems  to  be  a  serious  defect,  but  ultimately  proves  to  be  none 
at  all ;  for  the  manuscript  from  which  it  was  transcribed  was 
evidently  itself  anonymous.  In  spite  of  this  fact,  however,  in 
the  new  light  which  during  1902-5  was  brought  to  bear  on  the 
material  contained  in  the  Gould  volume,  the  author  finally 
succeeded  not  only  in  determining  beyond  all  doubt  the  original 
compiler  of  the  first  thirty  and  most  important  documents  con- 
tained in  the  Gould  manuscript,  but  also  in  elucidating  various 
other  problems  that  had  arisen  concerning  it. 

On  the  back  of  the  binding  of  the  Gould  Manuscript  are 
stamped  the  words,  "  Notices  of  the  Early  Baptists  ".  The  first 
words  within  the  volume  are  almost  as  anonymous, — "  A  RE- 
POSITORY of  Divers  Historical  Matters  relating  |  to  the 
English  Antipedobaptists.  Collected  from  Original  Papers  | 
or  Faithfull  Extracts.  |  ANNO  1712.  |  I  began  to  make  this 
Collection  in  Ian:  1710-11.  |  Numb:  1.  \  The  Records  of  An 
Antient  Congregation  of  Dissenters  |  from  w°^  many  of  y® 
Independttnt  &  Baptist  Churches  in  London  |  took  their  first 
rise :  ex  MSS  of  m^  H.  lessey,  w"''  I  rec^  of  M"".  Richarc^  | 
Adams."  With  these  few  words  for  his  chief  guide  to  the 
solution  of  the  problem  as  to  the  name  of  the  original  compiler, 
the  author  set  himself  to  the  task.  It  first  occurred  to  him 
that  the  Rev.  John  Lewis  of  Margate  might  possibly  have  been 
the  original  collector  of  the  various  documents  included  in  the 
Gould  transcript ;  but  it  was  found  necessary  to  abandon  this 
theory  at  once,  for  Lewis  in  one  place ^  quotes  Crosby's  version 
of  the  so-called  Kiffin  Manuscript  (No.  2  of  the  Gould  MS.)  in 
such  a  way  as  plainly  to  show  that  he  (Lewis)  had  never  seen 
the  original  and  had  to  take  Crosby's  statement  concerning  it 
for  what  it  was  worth.  Now  if  the  Rev.  John  Lewis  was  not 
the  compiler  of  the  material  at  present  comprised  in  the  Gould 
transcript,  it  seemed  to  the  writer  that  there  was  only  one 
other  person  at  all  likely  to  have  collected  these  documents. 
That  was  Benjamin  Stinton^  whose  manuscripts,  Crosby  says 

1  In  his  "  Brief  History  of  the  English  Anabaptists ",  "  a  2'i.  Edition 
prepared  for  the  Press  ",  fol.  41.  This  edition  was  never  printed,  but  exists 
in  manuscript. 

'  The  writer  is  not  the  first  to  suggest  Stinton  as  the  original  collector 


An  Examination  of  the  Gould  Manuscript     339 

(Vol,  I.,  p.  i),  furnished  a  large  proportion  of  the  material  used 
in  the  preparation  of  [volumes  i.  and  ii.  of]  "  The  History  of 
the  English  Baptists".  But  would  Stinton  meet  all  the  re- 
quirements of  the  case  ?  The  writer  began  to  look  carefully 
into  the  matter.  He  found  that  Crosby  says  (Vol.  iv.,  p.  863) 
that  Benjamin  Stinton  died  "on  the  11th  of  Feb.  1718.  in  the 
forty-third  year  of  his  age".  He  was  living  then  in  1712. 
Thus  far  well.  But  who  was  the  Mr  Richard  Adams  mentioned 
in  sections  1  and  2  of  the  Gould  Manuscript,  and  was  there  a 
person  of  that  name  living  in  1710,  who  would  have  been  likely 
to  possess  such  important  Baptist  documents,  and  especially  to 
have  given  them  to  Benjamin  Stinton  about  this  time  ? 

On  looking  at  Crosby  (Vol.  III.,  pp.  37-8)  the  author  found 
the  description  of  just  such  a  man,  who,  about  1676,  came  to 
London,  and  who  "'was',  says  Dr.  Calarny,  'an  Anabaptist,  and 
succeeded  Mr.  Daniel  Dyke,  in  the  care  of  the  congregation  at 
Devonshire-square,  a  man  of  great  piety  and  integrity '.  He 
lived  to  a  very  great  age,  by  reason  of  which,  he  could  not 
preach  some  years  before  his  death  ".  Now  William  Kiffin  had 
been  an  earlier  pastor  at  Devonshire  square,  and  it  would  seem 
extremely  likely  that  Mr  Adams  might  have  secured  these 
important  documents  and  later  have  given  them  to  the  pro- 
spective author  of  a  Baptist  History,  Benjamin  Stinton,  who  in 
1710  was  pastor  of  the  Baptist  Church  "upon  Horsely-down ", 
London,  having  succeeded  his  father-in-law,  the  well  known 
Benjamin  Keach,  in  the  pastoral  office,  and  concerning  whom, 
Crosby  says  (Vol.  iv.,  p.  365),  "  had  the  providence  of  God  con- 
tinued his  life,  till  he  had  accomplished  his  intended  design 
[of  writing  a  complete  Baptist  history],  I  doubt  not,  but  the 

of  the  material  now  embraced  in  the  Gould  MS.  Dr  Geo.  A.  Lofton  had 
made  the  same  suggestion  in  1899,  but  the  writer,  before  reading  his 
works,  independently  came  to  this  .same  conclusion,  and  is  the  first,  he 
believes,  definitely  to  prove  that  Stinton  was  the  compiler  only  of  the  first 
thirty  sections  of  the  Gould  MS.  The  two  works  of  Dr  Lofton,  published 
in  1899  and  entitled,  "English  Baptist  Reformation.  (From  1609  to 
1641  A.D.)...",  Louisville,  Kentucky,  and  "Defense of  the  Jessey  Records  and 
Kifl&n  Manuscript... Appendix  to  Engli.sh  Baptist  Reformation  from  1609 
to  1641  A.D.",  Nashville,  Tenn.,  deserve  a  wider  circulation  and  contain 
much  interesting  critical  information  closely  related  to  the  present  subject. 

22—2 


340  Early  English  Dissenters 

learned  would  have  readily  born  a  testimony  to  him,  and  have 
rank'd  him  amongst  the  greatest  men  of  his  time."  Crosby 
does  not  say  in  what  year  Richard  Adams  died,  but  in  the 
"Baptist  Year-Book"  he  is  reported  to  have  died  in  1716. 
Thus  the  probable  original  compiler  of  the  material  now  found 
in  the  Gould  Manuscript  had  evidently  been  discovered.  Still 
the  writer  naturally  desired  more  definite  evidence. 

In  the  autumn  of  1902  he  one  day  fortunately  noticed  a 
reference  to  a  Stinton  manuscripts  When  the  opportunity 
came  to  examine  it,  it  proved  to  be  a  small  quarto  in  its 
original  binding  with  the  title,  "  A  |  lOURNALL  [  Of  the 
Affairs  1  of  the  |  ANTIPiEDOBAPTIS^^  |  Beginning  with  the 
Reign  of  King  |  George,  whose  Accession  to  y®  Throne  |  was 
on  y^  First  of  August,  1714.  |  As  the  same  was  kept,  |  By 
Beniamin  Stinton  ".  For  convenience  we  will  call  this  manu- 
script A.  On  the  back  of  the  volume  was  written  in  ink, 
"  N° :  IV."  An  examination  of  the  manuscript  showed  that  it 
contained  the  original  text  of  only  a  considerable  part  of  the 
fourth  volume  of  Crosby's  "  History  of  the  English  Baptists ". 
This  was  rather  disappointing,  yet  even  such  a  discovery  was 
a  distinct  advance  toward  the  solution  of  the  problem  under- 
taken, for  it  now  appeared  probable  that  Crosby  embodied  in 
his  work  more  than  one  volume  written  by  Stinton. 

Not  long  after  the  writer  began  to  make  a  transcript  of  the 
documents  found  in  the  Gould  Manuscript,  and  to  study  the 
contents  of  two  other  early  manuscripts  collected  by  the  Rev. 
George  Gould.  One  of  these  latter  was  a  small  quarto,  evi- 
dently of  the  early  eighteenth  century,  bound  in  its  original 
green  binding,  entitled,  "An  Account  of  Some  |  of  the  |  Most 
Eminent  &  Leading  Men  |  among  the  |  English  Antipaedo- 
baptists.  I  Eccles:  44.  8.  |  There  be  of  Them  that  have  left  a 
Name  behind  |  them,  that  their  Praises  might  be  reported,  j  In 
Epistola  Bezse  Scripta.  1566.  |  Quosdam  inter  Anabaptistas  esse 
bonos,  veros  Servos  |  Dei,  Christi  Martyros,  &  charissimos  Fratres 
Nostros."  No  author,  no  place,  and  no  date  of  writing  are 
given.     For  convenience  we  will  call  this  manuscript  B. 

1  In  Dr  Williams's  Library,  Loudon. 


An  Examination  of  the  Gould  Manuscript    341 

Here  certainly  was  something  interesting.  The  manuscript 
was  written  in  two  different  hands,  and  from  the  general 
appearance  of  the  volume,  the  material  in  it,  and  the  charac- 
teristics of  the  first  hand,  it  appeared  to  be  nothing  less  than 
an  anonymous  work  of  Benjamin  Stinton's,  to  which  later  addi- 
tions had  been  made  by  some  one,  supposedly,  Thomas  Crosby, 
— a  conclusion  that  has  since  been  verified  beyond  all  doubt. 
Almost  every  important  item  in  the  volume  was  printed  some- 
where by  Crosby,  but  some  paragraphs  had  been  omitted  by 
him  and  some  parts  improved,  and  the  ordering  of  the  material, 
except  that  apparently  written  by  Stinton,  had  been  greatly 
changed.  Here,  indeed,  was  a  "  find  "  in  the  right  direction, 
that  later  might  profitably  be  more  closely  examined.  The 
other  original  manuscript  was  of  special  importance,  a  thin 
folio  bound  in  limp  vellum,  which  we  may  call  H.  It  had  no 
title-page,  but  two  or  three  of  its  sections  bore  the  date  1652. 
It  did  not,  however,  contain  any  of  the  first  numbered  docu- 
ments in  the  Gould  transcript. 

As  the  author  continued  his  study  of  the  Gould  volume, 
a  new  point  of  interest  occasionally  came  to  his  notice.  One 
day  he  discovered  that  this  manuscript  contained  in  reality  at 
least  two  main  divisions,  and  probably  an  intermediate  section 
originally  not  belonging  to  either,  and  that  this  material 
seemed  to  have  been  transcribed  from  two  or  more  distinct 
manuscripts.  He  came  to  this  conclusion  by  finding  that  the 
original  of  the  entire  latter  part  of  the  Gould  transcript,  with 
the  exception  of  the  final  note  in  the  Rev.  George  Gould's  own 
hand  concerning  William  Turner's  "A  preseruatiue,  or  triacle, 
agaynst  the  poyson  of  Pelagius"  [1551],  was  to  be  found  in  the 
old  manuscript  bound  in  limp  vellum  (i.e.,  H).  This  discovery 
appeared*  to  be  of  two-fold  importance, — first,  as  helping  to 

1  In  reality  the  discovery  was  of  but  little  value,  for  it  now  seems 
that  Crosby  copied  the  Berkshire  Records  as  well  as  the  intermediate 
sections  into  Stinton's  "  Repository ",  so  that  Mr  Keymer  made  his  copy 
not  from  the  original,  but  from  Crosby's  transcript.  Without  the  Stinton- 
Crosby  original,  therefore,  it  is  at  present  impossible  to  say  with  certainty 
whether  the  divergencies  between  the  Gould  transcript  of  the  Berkshire 
Records  and  the  original  manuscripts  were  due  to  Crosby  or  to  Mr  Keymer, 
but  probability  points  to  Crosby  as  their  almost  certain  source. 


342  Early  English  Dissenters 

determine  more  exactly  the  contents  of  the  volume  from  which 
the  first  thirty  sections  had  been  transcribed  ;  and  secondly,  as 
serving  by  comparison  to  give  an  accurate  idea  of  the  care 
which  Mr  Keymer  had  taken  in  preparing  this  transcript. 

Later  the  writer  undertook  to  make  a  copy  of  the  contents 
of  the  previously  mentioned  anonymous  and  undated  green 
quarto,  B ;  but  it  proved  too  extensive  a  task  and  was  shortly 
abandoned.  At  the  bottom  of  page  11,  however,  he  met  with 
an  important  statement,  in  which  reference  is  made  to  a  letter 
signed  "  H.  H."  (to  be  found  in  "  I.  P.  Anabaptismes  Mystry  of 
Iniquity "),  concerning  which  the  anonymous  author  of  the 
manuscript  says,  "  I  have  therefore  putt  it  into  y®  Collection 
of  Originals  Numb.  7." 

Turning  at  once  in  the  Gould  volume  to  "Numb:  7:"  the 
author  found  a  copy  of  this  very  letter  signed  "  H.  H."  Thus, 
a  direct  relationship  between  the  lost  original  of  the  first  thirty 
numbers  of  the  Gould  transcript  and  the  first  sixty-six  pages 
of  the  anonymous  green  quarto,  B,  had  evidently  been  found. 
They  were  undoubtedly  the  work  of  the  same  man,  and  that 
man  must  be  Stinton.  But  now  the  question  arose.  How, 
beyond  all  doubt,  could  these  manuscripts  be  linked  with  the 
name  of  Benjamin  Stinton  ?  It  will  be  remembered  that  re- 
ference has  previously  been  made  to  a  manuscript,  A,  on  the 
title-page  of  which  Stinton's  name  is  directly  given  as  the 
author.  On  examining  the  contents  of  this,  the  writer  found 
that  in  one  place  six  pages  (pp.  93-98)  had  providentially  been 
left  blank  where  a  letter  from  "  the  Elders  &  Churches  of  lesus 
Christ  at  Pensilvania  in  America"  "  of  the  20"'  of  luly"  [1715], 
should  have  been  inserted.  This  contained  a  "  particular 
account... of  the  begining  &  Progi'ess  of  the  Gosple  in  those 
parts  of  the  World,  and  of  the  Number  and  present  State  of 
the  Churches,..."  Now  a  copy  of  this  very  document  forms 
"  Numb:  26  "  of  the  Gould  Manuscript,  where  the  date  "  1715  " 
is  also  given.  Here,  then,  was  the  last  link  of  the  chain  that 
would  bind  these  three  volumes  together  and  make  Stinton, 
therefore,  the  original  compiler  of  at  least  the  first  thirty 
numbered  sections  in  the  Gould  transcript. 

A    further    discovery   confirmed    this   conclusion,    for   still 


An  Examination  of  the  Gould  Mamiso'ipt    343 

another  Stinton  original  was  found  in  the  Angus  Collection  at 
Regent's  Park  College.  This  was  a  small  quarto  in  modern 
binding,  which  we  will  call  G.  The  first  part  is  in  the  hand- 
writing of  Stinton  and  the  latter  part  in  that  of  Crosby.  The 
volume  contains  autographs  of  both  of  these  men,  and  the 
title-page  reads : — "  A  |  Journal  |  of  the  |  Affairs  of  y^  Anti- 
psedobaptists ;  |  begining  with  y®  Reign  of  King  George,  |  whose 
Accession  to  the  Throne  was  on  the  |  first  of  August :  1714:  j 
Kept  by  me,  Benja:  Stinton."  This  is  almost  exactly  the  title 
of  the  other  Stinton  manuscript  signed  with  his  name,  A, 
but  the  other.  A,  is  much  more  finished  and  complete  than 
this,  0,  while  this  is  certainly  written  in  his  own  hand. 

Now  this  Angus  copy,  G,  has  the  following  important 
statement  on  page  59 :  "  Towards  y®  latter  end  of  this  year 
[1716]  we  received  a  letter  from  y*"  Baptist  Ministers  & 
Churches  in  Pensilvania  in  America,  where  in  they  gave  us 
a  large  &  particular  Account  of  y'^  Begining  &  progress  of  the 
Gospel  in  those  Parts,  the  Present  Number  of  their  Churches 
y^  Names  &  Curcomstances  of  their  Ministers,  w^*^  several 
other  particulars,  a  Copy  of  w''**  I  have  put  in  my  Collection 
of  Historical  Matters...  "  A  transcript  of  this  forms  "  Numb: 
26  "  of  the  Gould  Manuscript,  as  previously  mentioned. 

Here,  then,  was  confirmation  of  the  evidence  placing  it 
beyond  all  doubt  that  Stinton  was  at  any  rate  the  original 
compiler  of  the  first  thirty  sections  of  the  Gould  transcript,  which 
(thirty  sections)  evidently  in  this  passage  he  calls  his  "  Col- 
lection of  Historical  Matters",  and  in  the  green  quarto,  B, 
"  y®  Collection  of  Originals  ".  This  Angus  Stinton  original,  G, 
also  served  to  establish  the  writer's  belief,  that  the  first  sixty- 
six  pages  of  the  anonymous,  undated  green  quarto,  B,  were 
written  in  Stinton's  own  hand  and  the  remainder  in  Crosby's 
own  hand,  for  a  comparison  of  these  two  manuscripts  made  the 
truth  of  that  supposition  unquestionable. 

It  will  have  been  noticed  that  the  writer  has  limited 
Stinton's  work  in  the  original  volume  from  which  the  Gould 
Manuscript  was  transcribed  to  merely  the  thirty  numbered 
sections,  thus  not  including  the  two  or  three  unnumbered 
sections    immediately  following.      This    seemed    necessary   for 


344  Early  Eiiglish  Dissenters 

three  reasons : — 1.  Stinton  cannot  possibly  have  written  some 
of  the  material  between  "  Numb:  30  "  and  the  beginning  of  the 
"  Records  of  the  Barkshire  Association  ",  for  at  least  one  dated 
section  is  years  too  late  for  Stinton  ever  to  have  seen.  2.  If 
Stinton  had  written  the  intermediate  sections  after  "  Numb : 
30  "  he  would  probably  have  numbered  them  also.  3.  One  of 
these  later  unnumbered  sections  has  reference  to  "  M""  Crosby's 
History  of  the  Baptists  sufferings",  and  is  largely  quoted  by 
him  in  his  third  volume.  Judging  from  these  facts  and  the 
contents  of  the  known  Stinton  originals,  the  writer  concludes 
that  Stinton  was  the  original  compiler  of  only  the  thirty  num- 
bered sections,  and  that  all  the  material  found  in  the  Gould 
transcript  after  "Numb:  30",  with  the  probable  exception  of 
the  final  note  concerning  Turner's  "A  preseruatiue  ",  was  added 
by  Crosby  on  succeeding  blank  pages  of  the  now  lost  Stinton 
manuscript.  The  fact  that  the  Berkshire  Records  are  called 
"  Records  of  the  Barkshire  Association "  suggests  that  Crosby 
transcribed  them  into  Stinton's  "  Repository  ". 

Still  later  the  writer  also  made  a  further  discovery  in  regard 
to  the  lost  original  of  the  first  main  division  of  the  Gould  tran- 
script, which  it  seems  strange  that  he  had  not  made  long 
before.  He  had  been  puzzling  over  the  question  as  to  what 
this  lost  manuscript  which  Stinton  in  one  place  calls  "y^ 
Collection  of  Originals "  and  in  another  "  my  Collection  of 
Historical  Matters  ",  had  as  its  actual  title,  and  whether  it  was 
dated  and  signed  with  his  name.  As  the  writer  glanced  over  the 
first  page  of  the  Gould  volume,  the  answer  came  unexpectedly, 
for  in  the  first  four  lines  of  the  transcript  he  saw  that  the  Rev. 
George  Gould  had  fortunately  preserved  the  exact  title  of  the 
lost  Stinton  original.  It  was  anonymous,  and  probably  Mr 
Gould  himself  did  not  know  who  was  the  actual  compiler  of 
the  first  thirty  sections,  but  he  evidently  did  know  with  cer- 
tainty that  Crosby  used  the  volume  from  which  he  had  the 
transcript  made\  and  this  was  the  title  of  the  original, — 
"  A  REPOSITORY  of  Divers  Historical  Matters  relating  to 
the  English  Antipedobaptists.     Collected  from  Original  Papers 

1  See  his  "  Open  Communion  and  the  Baptists  of  Norwich ",  1860, 
pp.  cxxiii-cxxiv. 


A 71  Examinatimi  of  the  Gould  Manuscript     345 

or  Faithfull  Extracts.  ANNO  1712."  This  lost  original  of  the 
"  Repository  "  we  will  call  D. 

It  may  be  safely  said,  then,  that  we  now  know  three  original 
manuscripts  of  Benjamin  Stinton,  and  the  copy  of  a  fourth.  It 
is  to  be  hoped  that  others  may  also  be  found,  as  others  un- 
doubtedly were  written.  Indeed,  of  at  least  one  other  we  have 
probably  the  entire  contents  given  in  the  Preface  to  Vol.  i.  of 
Crosby's  "  History  of  the  English  Baptists  "*.  Most  of  all,  how- 
ever, let  us  hope  that  the  original  "  Repository ",  D,  may  be 
located,  for  it  contains  the  now  well-known  statement,  which 
has  helped  to  revolutionize  early  English  Anabaptist  history. 
In  case,  however,  that  the  original  should  never  be  found,  let 
us  be  thankful  that  by  means  of  the  Gould  copy,  the  veil  of 
tradition,  which  has  concealed  a  point  in  the  history  of  the 
early  English  Anabaptists  for  two  hundred  years,  has  at  last 
been  removed. 

These  discoveries  naturally  have  an  important  bearing  on 
our  understanding  of  the  Gould  Manuscript.  They  show  that 
this  volume  is  not  a  unit  in  the  sense  that  all  the  material 
now  contained  in  it  was  originally  collected  by  one  man,  though 
it  is  now  evident  that  the  whole  text  with  the  possible  ex- 
ception of  the  final  note  was  copied  from  one  volume  by  Mr 
Gould  and  Mr  Keymer. 


The  discovery  of  the  three  previously  mentioned  Stinton 
manuscripts  also  helps  to  answer  certain  other  questions  that 
either  have  been,  or  may  be,  raised  in  relation  to  the  lost 
Stinton  "  Repository "  which  we  have  called  D,  or  to  the 
Gould  copy  of  it.  Among  others  the  following  may  be  men- 
tioned : — 

1.  Did  this  lost  Stinton  manuscript,  transcribed  by  Mr 
Gould  and  the  old  school-master,  contain  the  Jessey  Records, 
or  Memoranda  ("Numb:  1"),  and  the  Kiffin  Manuscript 
("Numb:  2"),  in  their  original  documentary  form,  or  copies  of 
them  made  by  Stinton,  and  written  on  the  pages  of  the 
manuscript  ?     Judging  from  the  three  Stinton  originals,  with 

'  Pp.  xviii-lxi.     See  also  Vol.  I.,  pp.  i-ii,  and  Vol.  iv.,  p.  365. 


346  Early  English  Dissenters 

which  the  writer  is  now  acquainted,  he  would  say  without 
hesitation  that  it  contained  transcripts  of  the  original  docu- 
ments, not  the  originals  themselves, 

2.  How  perfectly  did  Mr  Keymer  transcribe  these  copies 
of  the  original  documents  made  by  Stinton  ?  In  the  main 
apparently  with  very  great  accuracy,  but  still  there  may  have 
been  certain  words,  which  he  was  not  able  to  read,  and  which  at 
any  rate  are  omitted  in  the  Gould  Manuscript^ ;  there  may  also 
have  been  some  words,  usually  names,  that  he  slightly  misread, 
and  occasional  letters,  which  he  changed  from  capitals  to  small 
letters,  or  vice  versa ;  but  in  spite  of  these  comparatively  insig- 
nificant defects,  which  after  all  may  not  have  been  due  to 
Mr  Keymer,  the  transcript  as  a  whole  seems  to  be  not  only 
trustworthy,  but  accurate  in  a  minute  degree.  The  old  school- 
master has  left  us  no  merely  modernized  text,  though  he  may 
occasionally  have  forgotten  to  retain  the  original  spelling. 
Furthermore,  Stinton's  own  transcripts  were  without  doubt 
more  or  less  modernized,  for  in  his  day  little,  if  any,  attention 
was  paid  to  peculiarities  of  spelling.  Everyone  spelled  as  one 
pleased.  Therefore,  in  this  case  we  may  suppose  that  Stinton 
copied  these  documents  verbatim,  but  not  literatim. 

One  curious  mistake  the  old  school-master  possibly  made. 
Throughout  the  first  twenty-one  sections  of  the  Gould  Manu- 
script, but  not  later,  one  very  frequently  meets  with  the  word 
"ware"  for  "were".  This  looks  like  an  early  spelling,  but  as  the 
word  is  found  in  the  documents  transcribed  from  printed  books, 
where  of  course  no  such  spelling  is  used,  as  well  as  in  the  Jessey 
Memoranda  and  Kiffin  Manuscript,  and  further  as  "ware"  occurs 
in  the  heading  to  document  "  Numb:  12  "  which  probably  was 
added  by  Stinton  himself,  the  spelling  "  ware  "  in  the  Gould 
volume  cannot  so  easily  be  referred  back  to  a  writer  earlier 
than  Stinton  ^     In  no  original  manuscript  of  his  now  known  to 

*  Some  of  these  words  and  names  were  probably  omitted,  or  misread, 
by  Stinton  himself  in  his  transcript  because  of  their  illegibility,  or  the 
names  may  even  have  been  omitted  in  the  original  documents,  as  having 
been  forgotten  by  their  respective  writers. 

2  I  have  seen  one  letter  in  print  signed  by  Will.  Kiffin,  John  Spilsbery, 
and  Joseph  Fansom,  and  probably  written  by  Kiffin,  in  which  "ware" 


An  Examinati07i  of  the  Gould  Mmmscript     347 

the  writer,  however,  does  Stinton  appear  to  use  the  word 
"  ware ",  though  he  very  frequently  employs  the  old  form  of 
"  e  "  for  the  first  "  e  "  in  "  were  ".  Now  this  old  form  of  "  e  ", 
when  poorly  or  hastily  written,  somewhat  resembles  an  "a", 
and  Mr  Keymer,  while  he  was  transcribing  the  first  twenty-one 
sections  may  have  mistaken  "were",  when  thus  written,  for 
"  ware  ".  Later,  however,  having  perceived  that  this  old  form 
of  "  e "  was  not  "  a ",  he  repeated  the  mistake  no  more,  but 
always  transcribed  "  were  "  as  "  were  ",  whether  the  old  form  of 
"  e  "  was  employed,  or  the  new.  This  view  accounts  for  the 
spelling  "  were  "  occasionally  occurring  in  the  first  twenty-one 
sections  amid  many  instances  of  "  ware  ",  for  Stinton  sometimes 
wrote  the  word  as  we  write  it  to-day,  when  it  naturally  caused 
Mr  Keymer  no  difficulty. 

The  really  minute  accuracy,  however,  with  which  the  Gould 
Manuscript  was  transcribed  in  general,  may  be  illustrated  by 
the  reference  "2  Col.  2.  12."  found  in  "Numb:  2"  (the  Kiffin 
Manuscript)  under  the  date  1640.  Of  course  Mr  Keymer  knew 
there  was  no  II  Colossians,  but  he  retained  the  error.  The 
Rev.  George  Gould  in  his  introduction  to  "Open  Communion 
and  the  Baptists  of  Nowich "  corrected  it.  Crosby,  however, 
printed  the  error',  and  the  Rev.  John  Lewis  of  Margate,  in  his 
"Brief  History  of  the  English  Anabaptists",  "a  2^  Edition 
prepared  for  the  Press",  1741,  in  manuscript,  stars  this  re- 
ference and  remarks  in  the  margin,  "a  blunder,  I  suppose,  of  the 
press".  In  passing,  however,  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  Kiffin 
Manuscript  used  by  Crosby,  and  that  before  the  old  school- 
master, absolutely  agree  in  this  incorrect  reference.  Mr  Gould 
in  his  published  work  evidently  corrected  insignificant  im- 
perfections in  the  manuscript,  but  Mr  Keymer  seems  to  have 
made  no  intentional  corrections  or  additions  to  the  text  before 
him. 

3.  If  Mr  Keymer  intentionally  added  nothing  to  the  text,  who 
probably  originally  wrote  in  "  Numb :  2  "  (the  Kiffin  Manuscript) 

occurs  at  least  twice  (see  John  NickoUs'  "Original  Letters  and  Papera  of 
State,   Addressed    to    Oliver  Cromwell",   London,    1743,   pp.    159-160). 
Nevertheless  I  am  inclined  to  favour  the  view  expressed  in  the  text. 
1  Vol.  I.,  p.  102. 


348  Early  English  Dissenters 

the  suggestive  words,  "none  haveing  then  [1640]  so  so  [sic]  prac- 
ticed [dipping]  in  England  to  professed  Believers  "  ?  Certainly 
not  Crosby,  and  Crosby  merely  followed  Stinton,  so  far  as  can 
be  judged  from  an  hitherto  unpublished  section  of  the  green 
quarto,  B.  But  Crosby  says^  that  Stinton  "did  not  live  to 
digest  in  order  even  those  [materials  for  "an  History  of  the 
English  Baptists  "]  he  had  collected,  except  the  Introduction  ", 
which  doubtless  accounts  in  part  for  the  fact,  that  he  made 
this  mistake  in  regard  to  the  use  of  immersion  among  the 
earliest  English  Anabaptists,  in  spite  of  his  having  collected 
sufficient  material  pointing  to  an  entirely  different  conclusion. 
Crosby  evidently  never  went  much  deeper  into  this  matter  than 
Stinton,  with  the  result  than  an  error,  which  it  has  taken  half 
a  century  of  criticism  to  remove  and  explain,  crept  into  Baptist 
history.  Crosby  seems  to  have  omitted  as  much  as  possible  of 
Stinton's  work  which  would  have  tended  to  bring  any  un- 
certainty into  the  reader's  mind,  and  this  is  doubtless  the 
reason  why  he  omits  the  previously  mentioned  section ;  for  one 
can  easily  see,  that  while  Stinton  here  makes  one  or  two  strong 
statements,  he  has  nevertheless  not  thought  the  problem  really 
through.     The  passage  reads^ : — 

This  Man  [John  Smyth]  is  by  Some  of  y''  Zealous  writers 
against  the  Anabaptists  called  y"  beginer  of  Baptism  by  Dipping, 
&  the  Captain  of  that  &  other  Errors.  [Note :  "Walls  plain  discovery, 
&c  pref.  &  p  44."]  &  they  affirm  that  from  him  y®  English  Anabaptists 
have  Successively  received  their  New  Administration  of  Baptism, 
But  this  must  be  a  very  great  mistake,  nothing  is  more  evident  in 
History  than  that  there  were  many  who  rejected  y''  Baptism  of  Infants 
longe  before  this  Man  :  several  of  whom  were  put  to  death  both  in 
England  &  other  parts,  &  some  for  the  very  Crime  of  Dipping  also  : 
Tis  probable  indeed  y^  he  was  y''  first  from  among  The  English 
Brownists  y*^  ever  Embrased  y"  Opinion  of  Antipaedobaptism  :  <fe 
in  the  History  of  that  People,  when  mention  is  made  of  one  Sort 
of  Brownists  that  deny  y**  Baptism  of  Infants  &  seperated  from 
y''  other  who  retained  it  [Note :  "  Hereseo.  p.  87."],  it  seems  to 
referre  to  this  Smith  «fe  his  followers :  S''  In"  Floyer  also  observes 
that  y^  Practice  of  Immersion  was  vniversally  left  of  in  England 

1  Vol.  IV.,  p.  365. 

"  Stinton  MS.  B.  "An  Account...",  pp.  3-4.  In  place  of  this  section  a 
Hst  of  John  Smyth's  works  has  been  substituted  by  Crosby,  Vol.  i.,  p.  268. 


An  Examination  of  the  GouM  Manuscript     349 

about  y®  begining  of  K.  lames  y®  P^  so  that  he  might  be  y^  first 
y''  revived  that  manner  of  Administration  among  y''  EngUsh  iu 
those  times  :,.. 

Thus  it  appears  that  Stinton  also  could  hardly  have  written 
the  words  in  the  Kiffin  Manuscript  to  which  reference  has  been 
made,  and  if  neither  Crosby  nor  he  could  have  written  them, 
they  must  have  been  the  work  either  of  Kiffin  himself,  or  of 
Richard  Adams  (who  was  pastor  of  the  same  church  of  which 
Kiffin  had  formerly  been  in  charge,  and  to  whose  care  some  of 
Kiffin's  papers  had  evidently  been  intrusted),  a  man  who  lived 
to  a  great  age,  and  who,  in  order  to  make  clear  to  a  later 
generation  a  fact  that  was  all  but  lost,  might  possibly  have 
inserted  the  words  in  question.  The  writer,  however,  inclines 
to  the  view  that  these  words  were  a  part  of  the  original  docu- 
ment, but  if  they  were  not  it  would  make  no  real  difference,  for 
Richard  Adams  could  surely  be  quite  as  much  trusted  as  Kiffin 
in  making  such  a  simple  addition. 

4.  Is  there  longer  any  hope  that  the  original  Stinton 
"  Repository  ",  D,  will  be  found  ?  Certainly.  It  must  be  in 
existence  somewhere,  very  probably  in  some  old  Baptist  family, 
or  college  library,  and  diligent  search  should  be  made  to  locate 
the  volume.  It  will  doubtless  be  found  to  be  a  small  quarto, 
very  likely  in  its  original  binding,  and  containing  about  two 
hundred  or  more  pages  of  manuscript  written  in  two  different 
hands.  The  title-page  will  bear  no  author's  name,  but  the 
following  title,— "A  REPOSITORY  of  Divers  Historical 
Matters  relating  to  the  English  Antipedobaptists.  Collected 
from  Original  Papers  or  FaithfuU  Extracts.     ANNO  1712." 

Before  concluding  these  remarks  it  will  be  well  to  note  the 
important  bearing  the  discovery  of  these  four  Stinton  manu- 
scripts (in  this  number  is  included  the  Gould  copy)  has  on  a 
thorough  understanding  of  early  English  Anabaptist  history. 
At  last  after  the  lapse  of  two  hundred  years,  we  are  beginning 
to  obtain  a  glimpse  of  the  lights  and  shades  of  this  history,  to 
look  upon  these  early  writers  as  not  infallible,  and  persistently 
to  endeavour  to  get  behind  them  to  their  sources  in  order 
to  try  every  statement  of  importance  at  the  bar  of  criticism. 
To    be   sure,   the   results    are    not    always    flattering    to    the 


360  Ea7'ly  English  Dissenters 

correctness  of  preconceived  views,  but  after  all  the  truth  is 
approximated,  if  not  completely  reached,  and  it  is  truth,  of 
course,  not  fable,  or  tradition,  which  is  the  object  of  all  real 
historical  research. 

The  discovery  of  these  four  manuscripts,  also,  makes  Crosby's 
"  History  of  the  English  Baptists "  a  new  book,  and  possibly, 
though  not  necessarily,  takes  away  some  of  its  lustre.  We  can 
now  definitely  locate  in  these  Stinton  writings  perhaps  one  fourth, 
or  possibly  even  more,  of  the  contents  of  Crosby's  four  volumes 
excluding  the  Appendices,  and  thus  we  can  approximately  deter- 
mine the  proportion  of  the  work  done  by  Stinton.  Further,  by 
an  examination  of  these  manuscripts,  we  are  the  better  enabled 
to  appreciate  Crosby's  modest  remarks  that  "Had  the  ingenious 
collector  [Stinton]  of  them  ["  the  materials,  of  which  a  great 
part  of  this  treatise  is  formed  "]  lived  to  digest  them  in  their 
proper  order,  according  to  his  design,  they  would  have  appeared 
much  more  beautiful  and  correct,  than  now  they  do."  Crosby, 
however,  did  his  best,  and  when  we  rightly  estimate  the  work 
which  he  accomplished,  we  cannot  but  do  him  honour.  The 
fair  and  generous  spirit  that  he  shows  throughout  these  four 
volumes  must  make  his  work  a  model  in  that  respect  at  least 
for  any  future  English  Baptist  history,  which  though  it  may 
settle  some  problems  he  left  untouched  or  unsolved,  yet  can 
hardly  hope  to  surpass  his  work  in  fairness  and  conscientious- 
ness of  aim. 


As  a  complete  list  of  the  various  documents  contained  in 
the  Gould  Manuscript  may  be  of  interest,  the  following  extended 
description  of  its  contents  has  been  prepared. 

"NOTICES   OF    THE   EARLY   [ENGLISH]   BAPTISTS." 

[Title  stamped  on  the  back  of  the  MS.  which 

was  probably  found  on  the  back  of  Stinton's 

"  Repository".] 


1  Vol.  I.,  p.  i. 


An  Examination  of  the  Gould  Manuscri^d     351 

[First  Main  Division.] 
A  REPOSITORY  of  Divers  Historical  Matters  relating  |  to 
the  English  Antipedobaptists.    Collected  from  Original  Papers  | 
or  Faithfull  Extracts.  |  ANNO  1712.  [By  Benjamin  Stinton.] 

[First  item.] 
I  [Benjamin  Stinton]  began  to  make  this  Collection  in  Ian : 
1710-11. 


[The  Jessey  Records,  or  Memoranda.] 
Numb:  1.  I  The  Records  of  An  Antient  Congregation  of  Dis- 
senters I  from  w''^  many  of  y®  Independant  &  Baptist  Churches 
in  London  |  took  their  first  rise :  ex  MSS  of  M^  H.  lessey,  w'^'' 
I  rec^  of  M^  Richarc?  |  Adams. 

[The  Kiffin  Manuscript.] 
Numb:  2  j  An  Old  MSS,  giveing  some  Acco"  of  those  Baptists  | 
who  first  formed  themselves  into  distinct  Congregations,  or  | 
Churches  in  London.      [Space]   found   among   certain   Paper 
given  me  |  by  M''  Adams. 


Numb :  3.  |  The  confession  of  Faith  of  Those  Churches  w"''  are  j 
comonly  (though  falsly)  called  Anabaptists.  |  Subscribed  by 
them  in  y^  behalfe  of  Seven  Congregations  or  |  Churches  of 
Christ  in  London. 

[Text  not  given.] 

Numb:  4  |  An  Account  of  divers  Conferances,  held  in  y* 
Congre- 1  gation  of  w*"^  M''  Henry  lessey  was  Pastor,  about 
Infant- 1  baptism,  by  w*"*"  M""  H.  lessey  &  y''  greatest  part  of  that 
Congre  ]  gation  ware  proselited  to  Y®  Opinion  &  Practice  of  y*^ 
Antipedo-jbabtists.  |  being  an  old  M.S.S.  w''''  I  rec^  of  M""  Adams, 
supposed  I  to  be  written  by  M""  lessey,  or  transcribed  from  his 
lurnal. 

Numb:  5.  |  The  Oath  taken  by  Midwives  when  they  ware  | 
allowed  in  case  of  Necessity  to  Administer  Baptism. 

Numb:  6:  |  The  Abjuration  taken  of  4  Dutch  Anabaptists  |  in 
yt*^  Reign  of  Q.  Elizabeth. 


352  Earhj  English  Dissetiters 

Numb:  7:  I  A  Copie  rightly  related  of  An  Anabaptists  |  Letter 
written  to  his  sometimes  Accounted  Christian  |  Brethren  showing 
y^  Cause  of  his  Seperation  from  y^  Church  |  of  England,  indited 
by  a  Principle  Elder  in  &  of  that  |  Seperation. 
[In  the  margin.]  from  a  Treatise  |  intituled  Anabap- 1  tismes 
Mysterie  |  of  Iniquity  un-|  masked,  by  I.  P.  |  Anno  1623. 
[The  signature  of  the  letter  is  given  as  "  H.  H."] 


Numb:  8.  [  Two  Orders  of  y^  Parliament  of  y^  Coiiion  Wealth  | 
of  England,  Scotland  &  Ireland  concerning  |  the  Anabaptists. } 
Tombes*  Reven  [Review],    p''  3^  dedication 


Numb:  9.  |  The  Copy  of  A  Letter  written  by  y'  Rev*^  D'  Barlow  | 

afterwards  Lord  Bishop  of  Lincoln  to  M""  In°  Tombs.      Anno. 

1636. 

[In  margin.]   Tombes^  Reven  [Review].  Prefac:  3  Vol. 

Numb:  10.  |  An  Account  of  y®  Sufferings  of  M'  Laurence  Clark- 
son  I  for  Anabaptism,  in  y®  Year  1645,  &  his  recantation  of  y® 
Same.  |  taken  out  of  M""  Edwards  Gangraena,  pg  72. 


Numb:  11.  I  A  Collection  of  y«  Opinions  of  y«  Old  Lollards, 
New  I  Reformers  &  Anabaptists,  complained  of  By  y"  Convoca- 
tion in  I  the  Reign  of  Henry  y®  8^^.  w*^  y^  Articles  of  Religion 
agreed  upon  |  &  published  by  y"  Kings  Authority  in  opposition 
to  y«  Same.  |  Ex,  Fullers  Church  History,  Lib  5.  Sec.  3'*. 
pg  208 

Numb:  12.  |  D'  Burnets  Account  of  y*'  Anabaptists  y*-  lived  in 
y''  Reign  of  |  Edward  the  Sixth,  &  of  y^  Punishments  y''  ware 
then  Inflicted  upon  some  of  |  them,  particularly  of  y**  Burning 
of  loan  of  Kent,  an  English  woman,  |  &  George  Van  Parre,  a 
Dutchman.  |  His:  Refor:  Vol  2*^.  part  2\  pg  110.  111.  112.  113. 


Numb:  13.  |  M""  lohn  Fox's  Letter  to  Q:  Elizabeth  in  Faviour 
of  two  I  Dutch  Anabaptists  condemned  to  be  burnt  in  Smith- 
field.  I  Ex  Fullers  Church  Hist:  Cent  16.  pg.  104. 


An  Exainination  of  the  Gould  Manuscript    353 

Numb:  14.  |  The  Address  of  y®  Anabaptists  to  King  Charles  11^ 
before  |  his  Restoration  w'*^  their  Propositions  annexed  to  it,  & 
the  Let-|ter  sent  along  with  it  to  his  Majesty  then  at  Bruges  in 
y^  Year  |  1658.  [Space]  Ex.  Lord  Clarendons  His.  Rebellion. 
Vol  3.  p.  625.  I  Fo.  Edit:  1719.     Vo.  3.  p.  359. 


Numb:  15.  j  Two  Apologys  of  y^  People  called  Anabaptists,  |  pub- 
lished presently  after  y®  Insurrection  of  Venner  &  his  Accom- 
placies.  |  wherein  they  protest  both  against  y®  Principles  & 
Practices  of  |  that  Rebellious  Party.  Anno  1660.  |  ex  Gran- 
thams  Chris:  Prin:  [Christianismus  Primitivus]  Lib  2.  [ill.]  pg  7. 
[Text  not  given.] 


Numb:  16.  |  M*"  Fuller's  account  of  y'^  Begining  of  y^  Ana- 
baptists I  in  England :  w*''  a  discovery  of  his  Mistake  therein.  | 
from  his  Church  His:  Book  5.  pg  229. 


Numb:  17.  [  M"  Hutchinsons  Account  of  y®  Revival  of  Anti- 
psedobaptisni  j  towards  y®  latter  end  of  the  Reign  of  King 
Charles  y^  First. 


Numb:  18.  |  An  Account  [by  "M''  Francis  Bampfield"]  of  y^ 
Methods  taken  by  y**  Baptists  to  obtain  |  a  proper  Administrator 
of  Baptism  by  Immersion,  when  that  |  practice  had  been  so 
long  disused,  y*  there  was  no  one  who  had  been  so  |  baptized 
to  be  found,  w*^*^  y®  Opinion  of  Henry  Lawrence,  |  Lord  President, 
on  y®  Case. 

Numb:  19.  |  A  brief  Account  of  the  Sufferings  of  y^  People 
called  I  Anabaptis  [sic],  in  &  about  London,  in  y®  two  first 
Years  after  |  y®  Restoration  of  King  Charles  II-.  [Space] 
Anno  1661.  1662. 


Numb:  20.  |  Several  Antipaedobaptists  taken  up  for  Preaching 
against  |  y®  Act  of  Uniformity  made  y®  35.  Eliz,  &  against  y® 
Kings  Supremacy  |  in  Ecclesiastical  Matters.  Ex  Fullers  Au: 
Hist:  Book  11.  pg.  172. 

B.  23 


354  Early  English  Dissenters 

Numb:  21.  |  The  Tryall  of  M-.  Benja:  Keach  who  was  prose- 
cuted I  for  Wrighting  against  Infant  Baptism  &c,  with  an 
Account  of  y®  |  Punishment  inflicted  on  him  for  y^  Same. 
[Space]  Anno  1664.  |  Taken  from  a  Manuscript  found  among 
M'^  Keachs  Papers  after  his  Death,  [  which  as  he  informed  me 
when  alive  [Stinton  married  a  daughter  of  Keach,  and  so 
obtained  first-hand  information.]  was  sent  him  from  one  in  y* 
Country  |  who  was  present  both  at  his  tryall  &  Punishment, 
&  took  what  passed  in  |  Wrighting. 


Numb:  22.  |  An  Address  of  y®  Baptist  Ministers  in  & 
about  the  |  City  of  London,  presented  to  his  Majesty  King 

rd 

William  3^  |  upon  y^  French  Kings  proclaming  y®  Pretended 
Prince  of  Wales,  |  King  of  England,  &c.  from  y®  London 

Gazette  of  Decem'  29-.  1701.  |  Hampton  Court.  Dec*"  27.  The 
following  Address  from  y®  Baptist  |  Ministers  in  &  about  y®  City 
of  London  was  presented  to  his  Majesty  by  M*"  Stanet  [Mr. 
Stennett],  |  introduced  by  y®  R*':  Hon.  y®  Earl  of  Peterborough. 


Numb:  23.  |  An  Account  of  A  Church  that  usually  met  in  | 
South wark  near  S"  Mary  Overys  Church,  consisting  partly  |  of 
Paedobaptists,  &  partly  of  Antipsedobaptists,  from  their  first 
Con-|stitution  in  y®  Reign  of  K.  lames  I,  to  their  Dissolu- 
tion in  1705.  I  taken  out  of  their  Church  Book,  &c.  [Supposed 
to  have  been  written  by  "  old  M''  Webb  ".] 


Numb:  24.  |  An  Acco^^  of  12.  Anabaptists  who  were  Sentanced  | 
to  dye  at  Ailesbury  for  their  Nonconformity  in  1669. 
[At  end :  "  This  relation  I  received  from  M^  Bowles,  daughter 
to  Mary  lackman  y®  Widd  y^  was  condemn'd  according  to  y^ 
best  of  her  Rem(em)berance,  Apr:  10.  1715."] 


Numb:  25.  |  A  Letter  from  y®  Baptist's  Church  at  Waterford,  j 
in  Ireland,  to  some  of  y®  Same  Perswasion  at  Dublin  to  dis- 
swade  |  them  from  haveing  Comunion  w*"**  Persons  not  regularly 
Baptized. 


An  Examination  of  the  Gould  Manuscrijjt    355 

Numb:  26.  |  A  Letter  from  Pensilvania  giveing  an  Account  of 
y^  State  |  &  Number  of  y^  Baptized  Churches  in  that  Province 
in  the  Year  1715.  |  Philad:  Aug.  12„1714. 
[There  is  evidently  a  mistake  in  this  second  date.  The  letter 
is  clearly  signed  "Abell  Morgan"  and  dated,  "Philad:  luly  20. 
1715."  Crosby's  interpretation  of  the  meaning  of  the  second 
date  in  the  heading  may  be  seen  in  Vol.  i.,  p.  122.  In  his 
Vol.  IV.,  p.  162,  is  further  evidence  that  July  20,  1715,  is  the 
true  date,  whatever  that  in  the  heading  ought  to  be,  or  may 
mean.    "  M"  B.  Stinton  of  London  "  is  mentioned  in  this  letter.] 


Numb:  27.  |  A  Confession  of  y^  Faith  of  Several  Churches  [  of 
Christ,  in  y®  County  of  Somerset,  &  Some  Churches  |  in  y" 
Countyes  neer  adjacent.  |  ...  |  London....  1656. 
[The  whole  title,  but  not  the  text,  is  given  in  the  Gould  MS.] 


Numb :  28.  |  Part  of  a  Narrative  &  Complaint,  that  by  y®  help 
of  an  I  Honourable  Parliament  Man  was  presented  to  y^  King 

y«  26  of  j  y-^  5^^  Month,    luly   1660.  w^"^   the    Kings  Answer 
thereunto. 


Numb:  29.  |  Some  Parts  of  A  Confession  of  Faith  published  by 
Certain  |  Persons  term'd  Anabaptists  about  1611. 


Numb:  30.  |  Two  Sad  Instances  of  the  Persecution  practiced  by 
the  I  Protestants  themselves  in  the  Reign  of  King  Edward  y® 
6~,  I  against  y®  Anabaptists  met  with  in  Fox's  Latin  Book  of 
Martyrs,  |  but  left  out  in  his  English,  out  of  a  tender  regard,  it 
is  supposed,  to  the  |  Reputation  of  the  Martyrs  in  Q.  Maries 
Reign;  translated  by  M""  Peirce,  |  in  his  Answer  to  Nichols, 
pg  33.  w'^^  M''  Peirces  remarkes  on  y®  Same. 


[These  preceding  thirty  sections  evidently  constituted  Stinton's 
"  Repository  ",  or  "  Collection  of  Originals  ".  To  these,  how- 
ever, Crosby  added  some  pages  giving  the  titles  of  various  early 
Baptist  books  with  citations  from  them,  and  one  letter  signed, 
"Benj"  Miller"   and  dated  "Downton.   Ian''  14„173|".      The 

23—2 


356  Early  English  Dissenters 

letter  is  preceded  by  these  words :  "The  Copy  of  a  Letter  which 
I  [Crosby]  received  from  M'  Randall,  |  and  was  sent  to  him 
from  a  County  Gen^ ."  This  is  an  answer  to  a  letter  from  M"" 
Randall  evidently  requesting  information  concerning  the  early 
General  Baptists  in  Somerset  and  Dorset  to  be  inserted  in 
"M""  Crosbys  History  of  the  Baptists  sufferings".  Crosby 
printed  a  considerable  part  of  this  letter  in  Vol.  III.,  pp.  121-4 
and  126-7.] 

[Second  Main  Division.] 

[We  now  come  to  the  second  main  division  of  the  Gould 
volume,  and  have  to  deal  with  a  manuscript  which  Stinton 
probably  never  saw,  but  which  Crosby  evidently  copied  into 
Stinton's  "  Repository  ".  The  original,  H,  from  which  Crosby 
made  his  copy  is  the  thin  folio  volume  already  mentioned, 
bound  in  limp  vellum.  It  has  no  title,  but  Crosby  in  his 
transcript  fortunately  indicated  it  by  the  words  "  Records  of 
the  Barkshire  Association".  Its  records  go  back  as  far  as 
"octob:  1652"  and  the  latest  record  is  of  a  "Meeting  at 
Abingdon  the  Twenty  third  day  of  September  1708".  About 
thirty-five  pages  of  records,  evidently  not  the  earliest,  have 
been  torn  out  of  the  original,  but  that  must  have  been  done 
many  years  ago,  probably  before  1700.  Between  the  year 
1659  and  the  year  1705,  meetings  may  not  have  been  held 
very  regularly,  and  of  the  meetings  that  were  held  no  account 
remains.  The  later  records  seem  to  have  been  written  by 
Thomas  Barfote,  "  Messenger  from  Witney ".  The  name  of 
"los:  Stennett",  also,  is  on  the  fly-leaf  of  the  original  under 
the  date  "  1747  ".  The  contents  of  this  thin  folio  makes  in  the 
Gould  volume  forty-four  closely  written  pages,  and  with  this 
material  and  the  closing  note  on  Turner's  "A  preseruatiue" 
[1551]  the  transcript  ends. 

It  may  be  added  in  closing  that  if  the  English  Baptists  of 
to-day  have  a  greater  knowledge  of  their  history  than  they  have 
had  since  Stinton's  time,  it  is  to  the  Rev.  George  Gould  of  Nor- 
wich that  they  are  first  indebted  for  preserving  the  at  present 
only  known  first-hand  copy  of  this  valuable  and  long  lost 
Stinton-Crosby  Manuscript.] 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  CHURCHES  OF  NEW  ENGLAND   UNTIL 
ABOUT   1641 

The  English  congregations  established  in  New  England 
before  1641  naturally  deserve  some  notice  in  this  work.  That 
field,  however,  has  already  been  so  thoroughly,  and  on  the  whole 
so  scientifically,  studied,  that  there  is  little  need  for  us  to 
devote  to  it  more  than  a  passing  glance.  We  will,  therefore, 
only  touch  upon  certain  general  features  of  early  New  England 
religious  history,  which  seem  thus  far  to  have  been  more  or 
less  unnoticed,  but  which  nevertheless  should  be  very  helpful  in 
determining  the  true  ecclesiastical  situation  in  that  territory 
during  this  period. 

When  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  landed  at  Plymouth  in  1620 
under  the  leadership  of  Elder  William  Brewster,  they  did  not 
establish  a  new  congregation,  but  until  John  Robinson's  death 
in  1625,  and  perhaps  even  later,  remained  a  branch  of  the 
parent  church  back  in  Leyden.  It  should  also  be  kept  in  mind 
that  the  members  of  Robinson's  congregation  who  became  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers  were  probably  no  longer  strict  separatists,  but 
seem  to  have  been  in  the  process  of  becoming  non-separatist 
Independent  Puritans,  who  though  they  may  not  as  a  whole 
up  to  this  time  have  been  quite  so  broad-minded  as  more 
professed  followers  of  Henry  Jacob,  must  nevertheless  have 
been  well  leavened  with  'Jacobite'  doctrine'. 

*  In  spite  of  the  tradition  that  the  Puritan  church  at  Boston  was 
modelled  after  that  at  Plymouth,  there  curiously  seems  at  the  first  to  have 
been  a  considerable  difference  between  the  views  maintained  by  these  two 
congi-egations.  At  Boston  apparently  little  distinction  was  originally 
made  between  the  church -members  and  those  who  merely  attended  the 
services.  At  Plymouth  a  more  evident  separation  between  the  world  and 
the  church  was  discernible.     In  fact,  for  a  time  the  church  at  Plymouth 


358  Early  English  Dissenters 

It  was  several  years  after  1620  before  the  next  successful 
colony  landed  on  the  shores  of  Massachusetts  Bay  not  far 
distant.  Those  who  now  began  to  frequent  this  territory  were 
for  the  most  part  either  Presbyterian,  or  Independent  Puritans, 
who  were  not  separatists,  but  denied  that  they  had  any  thought 
of  separation  from  the  Church  of  England,  a  fact  hitherto  too 
much  overlooked. 

Dr  Dexter  has  given  the  impression  that  these  Puritans 
were  ready  to  accept  Plymouth  Congregationalism  (he  means 
by  this  separatist  Congregationalism)  as  soon  as  they  reached 
American  shores,  and  that  under  the  influence  of  the  Plymouth 
congregation  they  at  once  adopted  a  sort  of  Puritanized  Congre- 
gationalism, or  Congregationalized  Puritanism.  Several  years  of 
study  in  the  source  literature  of  early  English  and  American 
Separatism  has  convinced  me  that  there  is  nothing  further 
from  the  truth.  If  the  Plymouth  congregation  as  such  had 
any  influence  at  all  in  shaping  the  church  polity  of  the  Puritan 
churches  in  Massachusetts  Bay  taken  as  a  whole,  it  was 
evidently  infinitesimal,  and  it  seems  exceedingly  strange  that 
this  fact  does  not  appear  to  have  been  recognized  by  one  so 
learned  as   Dr  Dexter. 

Indeed,  there  seems  to  be  nothing  in  the  church  organization 
and  practice  of  the  early  New  England  Puritan  congregations  for 
which  they  were  necessarily  indebted  to  John  Robinson,  nor  do 
these  churches  as  a  whole  appear  particularly  to  have  studied 
the  Plymouth  congregation  as  a  model.  Certainly,  too,  they 
did  not  at  once  become  separatist,  but  on  the  contrary  looked 

may  even  have  maintained  a  moderately  separatist  attitude  towards  the 
Church  of  England.  This  apjjears  to  be  suggested  in  a  letter  of  Roger 
Williams  to  John  Cotton  cited  by  Benjamin  Scott,  F.R.A.S.,  in  a  pamphlet 
entitled,  "  The  Pilgrim  Fathers  neither  Puritans  nor  Persecutors "  (third 
edition,  London,  1891,  p.  43),  where  he  (Williams)  says:  '"In  New 
England,  being  unanimously  chosen  teacher  at  Boston  before  your  dear 
father  came,  divers  years,  I  conscientiously  refused,  and  I  withdrew  to 
Plymouth,  because  I  durst  not  officiate  to  an  UNSEPARATING  people, 
as  upon  examination  and  conference  I  found  them  (i.e.,  of  Boston)  to  be.'" 
But  if  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  at  first  really  maintained  such  an  attitude, 
a  decided  change  must  have  taken  place  before  1647,  as  we  shall  see  later 
in  this  chapter. 


The  Churches  of  New  England  until  1641     359 

upon  themselves  as  true  congregations  of  the  Church  of 
England.  In  fact,  so  much  impressed  with  this  idea  was  one 
"  A.  T.",  who  wrote  in  1631,  and  whose  work  has  been  previously 
mentioned,  that  he  suggests  that  some  English  people  in 
Holland  even  then  were  migrating  to  New  England  in  order 
to  join  the  Church  of  England^ ! 

But  if  this  is  true,  how  and  when  did  these  Puritan 
churches  become  separatist  ?  One  might  think  that  this  question 
could  be  answered  by  suggesting  that  the  change  occurred  at 
the  time  of  their  arrival  on  American  soil,  and  through  the 
direct  and  immediate  influence  of  the  congregation  of  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers  at  Plymouth.  That  this  is  not  the  true 
explanation,  however,  is  perfectly  apparent  from  John  Higgin- 
son's  "  Attestation  "  in  Cotton  Mather's  "  Magnalia  "  cited  in 
the  note  at  the  bottom  of  this  page,  as  well  as  from  evidence 
which  will  be  presented  later.  On  the  contrary,  in  so  far  as 
the  traditional  dominating  influence  of  the  congregation  of  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers  is  concerned,  history  appears  to  tell  us  quite 
another  story,  namely,  that  the  early  Puritan  congregations  in 
New  England  were  principally,  if  not  wholly,  organized  after 

1  See  "  A.T."'s  "  A  |  CHRISTIAN  REPROFE  |  AGAINST  |  CON- 
TENTION. |  ...",  16.31,  p.  40:  "some  declining  to  the  Chiirch  of 
England,  &  their  lining,  other  going  a  great  compasse  to  new  England  to 
communicat  with  the  Church  of  England  :..." 

This  view  is  confirmed  in  John  Higginson's  "  Attestation "  at  the 
beginning  of  Cotton  Mather's  "Magnalia  Christi  Americana^',  London, 
1702  [p.  viii],  where  the  following  passage  occurs  : — 

'■'■Ninthly,  That  the  Little  Daughter  of  New- England  in  America,  may 
bow  down  her  self  to  her  Mother  England  in  Europe,  presenting  this 
Memorial  imto  her  ;  assuring  her,  that  tho'  by  some  of  her  Angry  Brethren, 
she  was  forced  to  make  a  Local  Secession,  yet  not  a  Separation,  but  hath 
always  retained  a  Dutiful  Respect  to  the  Church  of  God  in  England  ;..." 

These  early  Puritan  Congregational  churches  steadily  denied  that  they 
were  composed  of  separatists,  and  their  friends  supported  them  in  this 
contention.  Such  well-informed  men  as  Gov.  Winthrop,  Gov.  Bradford, 
John  Cotton,  and  John  Higginson  all  agree  in  denying  that  the  Puritan 
churches  of  New  England  were  separatist.  It  was  only  their  enemies,  or 
those  who  were  jealous  of  New  England,  that  sought  to  foist  upon  these 
Puritans  the  odious  name  of  separatists,  while  others  in  England  outside 
their  circle,  persisted  in  terming  them  semi-separatists. 


360  Early  English  Dissenters 

their  own  ideals,  while  the  Plymouth  congregation  with  the 
passing  years  seems  gradually  to  have  become  more  and  more 
like  them,  and  finally  to  have  lost  altogether  any  distinctive 
character,  which  it  may  originally  have  possessed  \  Only  as 
the  result  of  many  changes  which  have  taken  place  during  the 
period  of  time  intervening  between  that  day  and  our  own,  have 
these  Puritan  congregations  gradually,  and  by  a  practically 
unnoticed  evolution,  come  to  be  separatist  as  they  now  are. 

Hence  it  may  be  said  that  the  origin  of  what  is  to-day 
termed  Congregationalism  both  in  England  and  America  cannot 
be  traced  back,  except  indirectly,  either  to  Robert  Browne  or  to 
Henry  Barrowe.  It  had  quite  another  source,  namely,  the 
Independent  Puritanism  which  was  first  developed  on  the 
Continent  by  such  men  as  Henry  Jacob,  Hugh  Peters,  Thomas 
Hooker,  John  Davenport,  and  others^  Nevertheless,  while 
Browne  had  no  direct  connection  with  this  later  development 
in  the  organization  of  Congregational  churches,  yet  both  be- 
cause of  his  early  proclaiming  of  the  principles  of  Congre- 
gationalism, and  because  of  the  change  which  with  time  has 
come  over  churches  which  were  of  Puritan  origin,  we  may  still 
look  upon  Browne  as  in  a  very  real  sense  the  father  of  modern 
Congregationalism. 

The  truth  of  what  has  thus  far  been  said  is  borne  out  by  the 
statements  both  of  Governor  Bradford  and  of  John  Cotton,  two 
writers  as  trustworthy  as  any  produced  by  early  New  England, 
who  fortunately  represent  respectively  the  point  of  view  of  the 
Plymouth  congregation  and  that  of  the  New  England  Puritan 
churches. 

The  charge  that  the  American  Puritans  had  patterned  their 

1  That  the  Plymouth  congregation  about  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth 
century  was  in  no  important  degree  diflferent  from  the  well-known  Puritan 
(Presbyterian)  churches  in  New  England,  is  made  manifest  by  the  fact 
that  in  the  list  of  the  New  England  ministers  who  belonged  to  the  first 
Classis,  the  ministers  of  the  church  at  Plymouth  are  given  without  any 
distinction  being  made  between  them  and  the  ministers  of  well-known 
Puritan  (Presbyterian)  settlements.  See  Cotton  Mather's  '■'■  Magnalia^\ 
1702,  Book  III.,  pp.  2-3. 

2  Francis  Johnson,  before  he  became  a  separatist,  might  be  named  as 
one  of  this  number. 


aDifeourfe  of  fome  trouble^/ 

anti  ertcrmmunications  in  tl)e  amuCDcti 

<^n0lif^  Church  at  Amiicvdara. 

^\Mtdtt)  fojfunD^pcatifeiStttclawbin  t^  patfacetDtJjepaOoiw 

«ft()C  rapd  Church. 

l^^re  t^etDOjDc  of  tfie  Lord  all  pee  tfjat  tremWe  at  ^tiJ  toojtbei  pour 

b^etfjifn  tOat  Ijateo  poti ,  Atio  rail  pou  out  fo>  nip  natmp  fake.  lapo.  let  tge  Loid 
bealO|tfifD>tiut|)ei  ftjall  apptacetopouctop,  auDtgep  f^albe  afbam^d. 

jif  F*ral./j.!i.i3.i4. 

^urelp  mine  enemp  titti  not  biffame  mee ,  foi  3  conld 

^atie  b02ne  it  rntptliec  did  mpne  aDUerfotie  ejcalt  ^tmrelfi  agatnll 

liue :  J  ttjoiilt  f)atie iitti am fcoin  ^tm  ,13. ^itit \aa9 t^oii  0  man  ebrti  inn  coinpaiinui ,  lun 
aapDt ,  anxt  nip  rouiOtac.  14.  S3l)U4  tiHigitreti  in  confulnng  togrttan .  anO  twnt 
iiuot{)el)otifeof<$olia0tompatiuiii0.  ^ 

f  i.P«.3.iy.i<5.i7, 

S^anctifie  tlje  lio^tje  <I5oD  in  pone  f^tam,  antj  be  tebie 

arama  to  siutan  anruDettoeDerpmantDat  arketDpouareatott 

of  tbtUoptmattgtnpoUyiO.  »tiD  t^jat  tnitd  lueelineci  ant>  criutmrt^tbac 

Jnjfittiepfpeakf  etoiUof  pou  aa  of  eblll  Doers ,  tt)/pinan  bc«niainc& ,  tuljic^  Wam» 
iioucaoc6tonlJftfationjn>ffliuil.    i7.5PojitiBbfttet  Ctf  tbetoiUofGoi 
be  fa}  ti)iit  ptt  futf rr  fo.z  turtl  i>  ottis ,  tt)rii  fo;  ebill  Qoiits. 

jg"  3.1ohn,verr.9,io. 

3  to^ote  i^nto  tlie  Ctjnrdi  >  bnt  SDiottcplics  >  tofticfi  lo^ 

Det^to^aDetlje  preeminence  among  tljem ,  temuetlj  U0  not:  io« 

ta>iJ6rtfp;e  if  5  come,  ^luillfteclarc tiieOefOcolulncljljCEOortl),  piatnug  agaiii(1b6luul 
niajinonatuouiee ,  ano  not  thcrfiuith  coiimit ,  ntjtiitr  lire  biinfrtfc  crcnbn J 
tj)eb;et()^it.t)utfo;biDbctl)tl)eiiitt)atU)aulD.aiiDca|lctytbciu 
out  of  tl^e  Chuiwii. 


€  i^^Weti  at  amaettiam» 
1605, 

Title-page  of  Geokc4e  Johnson's  "discourse  of  some  troubles",  1603. 
(Size  of  original  7|in.  x5iin.)     See  Vol.  i.,  pages  158-9. 


The  Churches  of  New  England  until  1641     361 

church  government  after  that  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  seems  to 
have  been  first  made  by  William  Rathband  in  "A  Briefe 
Narration  of  some  Church  Courses",  1644\  and  repeated  by 
Robert  Baillie  in  "A  Dissvasive  from  the  Errours  Of  the  Time", 
London,  1645,  where  he  says: — 

"  Master  Robinson  did  derive  his  way  to  his  separate  Con- 
gregation at  Leyden;  a  part  of  them  did  carry  it  over  to 
Plymouth  in  New-England;  here  Master  Cotton  did  take  it 
up,"  2  and  again,  "  the  most  who  settled  their  habitations  in 
that  Land  [of  New  England],  did  agree  to  model  themselves 
in  Churches  after  Robinsons  patern."^ 

To  this  charge  John  Cotton  replied  that  it  was  true  that 
the  Puritans  in  New  England  did  establish  churches  of  the 
same  pattern  [i.e.,  Presbyterian,  or  Congregational,  Puritan 
Churches,  which  however  were  not  separatist],  "  one  like  to 
another  [though  "  I  do  not  know,  that  they  agreed  upon 
it  by  any  common  consultation  "].  But  whether  it  was  after 
Mr.  Robinsons  pattern,  is  spoken  gratis:  for  I  beleeve  most 
of  them  knew  not  what  it  was,  if  any  at  all."^ 

Cotton,  further,  says  distinctly  that  he  himself  did  not  obtain 
his  views  from  Robinson,  but  from  three  [Independent]  Puritans, 
namely,  Robert  Parker,  Mr  Baynes,  and  Dr  Ames,  who,  it  will 
be  remembered,  were  friends  of  Jacob.  These  taught  Cotton 
that  "  the  matter  of  the  visible  Church  "  consisted  in  "  visible 
Saints  " ;  that  "  the  form  of  it "  was  "  a  mutuall  Covenant, 
whether  an  explicite  or  implicite  Profession  of  Faith,  and 
subjection  to  the  Gospel  of  Christ  in  the  society  of  the  Church, 
or  Presbytery  thereof " ;  and  that  "  the  power  of  the  Keyes  ", 
i.e.,  of  excommunication,  etc.,  belonged  to  each  particular 
"  visible  "  congregation.  Even  rigid  separatists  could  not  have 
presented  these  views  to  him  more  clearly. 

Cotton  and  the  early  New  England  Puritans,  however, 
were  never  separatists  from  the  Church  of  England.  Says  he  : 
"  No  marvail,  if  Independents  [Puritan  Congregationalists] 
take  it  ill  to  bee  called  Brownists,  in  whole,  or  in  part.     For 

1  P.  1.  2  p,  54,  3  p.  55. 

*  In  "The  Way  of  Congregational  Churches  Cleared",  London,  1648, 
p.  17. 


362  Early  English  Dissenters 

neither  in  whole,  nor  in  part  doe  we  partake  in  his  Schism.    He 

separated  from  Churches  and  from  Saints :  we,  onely  from  the 

world,  ..."^  as  was  the  custom  of  all  Puritans,  and  again:  "It  is 

an  unjust  and  unworthy  calumny  to  call  either  Cotton  or  the 

Apologers,   the   children   of . . .  Brownists    [Barrowists].      They 

never  begot  us,  either  to  God,  or  to  the  Church,  or  to  their 

Schism : ...  so  we  have  ever  born  witnesse  against  it  [separatism], 

since  our  first  knowledg  of  it."^ 

Not  only  does  Cotton  disclaim  that  the  Puritans  took  their 

views  from  John  Robinson,  but  Governor  Bradford  admits  that 

what  Cotton  says  is  true* : — 

And  whereas  Mr.  Baylie  affirmeth  that,  however  it  was,  in  a 
few  years  the  most  who  settled  in  the  land  [New  England]  did 
agree  to  model  themselves  after  Mr.  Robinson's  pattern,  we  agree 
with  reverend  Mr.  Cotton,  that  '  there  was  no  agreement  by  any 
solemn  or  common  consultation ;  but  that  it  is  true  they  did,  as 
if  they  had  agreed,  by  the  same  spirit  of  truth  and  unity,  set  up, 
by  the  help  of  Christ,  the  same  model  of  churches,  one  like  to 
another ;  and  if  they  of  Plymouth  have  helped  any  of  the  first 
comers  in  their  theory,  by  hearing  and  discerning  their  practices, 
therein  the  Scripture  is  fulfilled  that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like 
unto  leaven  which  a  woman  took '... 

Now  John  Cotton,  like  Governor  Bradford,  was  not  only 

a  very  prominent  and  much  respected  man,  but  he  also  arrived 

in  New  England  at  a  very  early  period,  and  it  is  significant  that 

he  came  with  the  Independent  Puritan  Thomas  Hooker,  who 

had  previously  been  in  Holland.     This  is  what  Cotton  says 

concerning  his  arrival : — 

It  was  [in  September]  in  the  yeare  1633.  when  Mr.  Hooker, 
Mr.  Sto7ie,  with  my  self  arrived  in  the  same  Ship  together :  and 
being  come,  we  found  severall  Churches  gathered ^  and  standing  in 
the  same  Order,  and  way,  wherein  they  now  walke  :  at  Salem,  at 
Boston,  at  Water-Towne,  at  Charle-  [CharIes-]Towne,  (which  issued 
out  of  Boston)  at  Dorchester  and  Rockeshury  \^Roxhury\ ...* 

These  churches  he  looks  upon  as  quite  distinct  fii-om  that  at 
Plymouth,  but  adds  "that  some  of  the  first  commers  might  helpe 

1  "The  Way  of  Congregational  Chm-ches  Cleared'\  London,  1648,  p.  9. 

2  Ihid.,  p.  10. 

3  Alexander  Young's  "  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  the  Colony 
of  Plymouth,  from  1602  to  1625",  Boston,  p.  426. 

*  "The  Way  of  Congregational  Churches  Clear ed^\  London,  1648,  p.  16. 


The  Churches  of  Neio  England  until  1641     363 

[might  have  improved]  their  [own]  Theory  by  hearing  and 
discerning  their  practice  at  Pli/mniouth:..."^  However,  later  on 
the  same  page  he  gives  the  passage  cited  earlier  in  this  chapter, 
where  he  says  he  doubts  if  most  of  the  Puritans  even  knew  what 
John  Robinson's  congregation  was  like. 

That  these  early  New  England  churches  were  considered 
by  their  organizers  as  Puritan  congregations  of  the  Church 
of  England,  is  made  plain  by  Cotton's  own  statements  as 
follows : — 

Nor  doe  I  yet  understand  why  he  [Robert  Baillie]  should  ac- 
count the  Religion  of  New- England  another  Religion,  then  that 
of  England  and  Scodand  and  other  Reformed  Churches-, 
the  form  of  Church-government  wherein  we  walk  doth  not  differ 
in  substance  from  that  which  Mr.  Cartwright  pleaded  ^ 
hee  [Roger  Williams]  su[s]pected  all  the  Statos  conventus  of  the 
Elders  [in  New  England]  to  bee  unwarrantable,  and  such  as  might 
in  time  make  way  to  a  Presbyteriall  government  [i.e.,  of  a  State 
Church]  ^ 

To  be  sure,  the  church  at  Salem  asked  the  Plymouth  con- 
gregation for  its  approval  of  their  church  organization,  but 
perhaps  chiefly  after  the  organization  had  been  effected,  as  may 
be  inferred  from  the  following  letter  to  Governor  Bradford  con- 
cerning the  formation  of  the  Salem  congregation' : — 

The  .  20.  of  luly  [1629],  It  pleased  the  lord  to  moue  the  hart[?] 
of[?]  our  God[1]  to  set  it  aparte  for  a  sollemne  day  of  humilliation, 
for  the  choyce  of  a  pastor,  &  Teacher  The  former  parte  of  the  day 
being  spente,  in  praier.  &  teaching ;  the  later  parte  about  the 
Election,  which  was  after  this  maner  The  persons  thought  on 
(who  had  been  ministe[rs]  in  England)  were  demanded  concerning 
their  callings,  they  acknowledged  ther  was  a  towfould  calling,  the 
one  an  Inward  calling,  when  the  lord  moued  the  harte  of  a  man 
to  take  that  calling  vpon  him,... The  second  wa[s'?]  an  outward 
calling  which  was  from  the  people,  when  a  Company  of  beleeuei's 
are  loyned  togither  in  Couenante,  to  walke  togither  in  all  the  ways 
of  God.  And  euery  member  (being  men)  are  to  haue  a  free  voyce, 
in  the  choyce  of  their  officers,  &C  Now  we  being  perswaded  that 
these  .  2  .  men,  were  so  quallified, ...we  saw  noe  reason  but  we  might 

*  "The  Way  of  Congregational  Churche.s  Cleared",  London,  1648,  p.  16. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  25. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  27.  «  Ibid.,  p.  55. 

^  "History  of  the  Plimoth  Plantatiou...Written by  William  Bradford", 
Loudon,  1896,  p.  173. 


364  Early  English  Dissenters 

freely  giue  our  voyces,   for   their   Election,... So   m''  Skelton   was 
chosen  pastor,  and  m''  Higgison  to  be  teacher;... 
And  now  good  S*".  I  hope  that  you,  &  the  rest  of  gods  people... with 
you,  will  say  that  hear  was  a  right  foundation  layed, . . . 

It  is  true  also  that  the  congregation  which  was  organized  at 
Charlestown  on  July  30,  1630,  and  which  was  at  once  divided 
into  three  distinct  churches  (at  Charlestown,  Watertown,  and 
Dorchester),  asked  the  interest  and  prayers  of  the  congregation 
at  Plymouth,  and  the  advice  of  Samuel  Fuller,  Allerton,  and 
Winslow  as  to  church  governments 

We  may  accordingly  admit  that  four  of  the  many  New 
England  churches  organized  before  1642  possibly  received  some 
slight  help  from  the  congregation  at  Plymouth  at  the  time  of 
their  organization.  There,  however,  the  direct  influence  of  the 
Plymouth  church  seems  to  have  ceased,  and  we  do  not  believe 
that  its  indirect  influence  extended  much  further,  because  of  the 
extreme  probability  that  the  views  of  the  Independent  Puritans 
concerning  church  polity  were  either  well  formulated  before 
they  ever  crossed  the  ocean,  or  may  have  been  gained  from 
other  Puritan  congregations  already  established  in  New  Eng- 
land. Furthermore,  as  the  Plymouth  church  itself  was  probably 
not  rigidly  separatist  at  this  time,  even  those  Puritan  churches 
which  received  advice  from  its  members  could  not  logically 
trace  their  origin  through  it  back  to  strict  separatism. 

Indeed,  it  is  clearly  noticeable  that  most  of  the  early 
settlers  of  New  England  were  Puritans,  not  separatists.  Thus, 
for  instance,  came  John  Cotton  in  1633  and  was  chosen  pastor 
of  the  Charlestown-Boston  church.  In  the  same  way  came 
Hugh  Peters  in  1635,  while  John  Davenport  arrived  less 
than  two  years  later.  Even  Roger  Williams  on  his  arrival, 
though  perhaps  less  settled  in  his  convictions  than  the  average 
Puritan,  it  should  be  remembered,  was  not  a  close  separatist. 
One  might  almost  say  that  he  was  exiled  into  rigid  separatism. 
It  was  also  practically  an  Established  Church  which  expelled 

1  See  a  letter  of  Samuel  Fuller  and  Edward  Winslow  to  William 
Bradford,  Kalph  Smith,  and  William  Brewster,  dated  Salem,  July  26, 
1630,  contained  in  "  Governour  Bradford's  Letter  Book  "("  Collections  of 
the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  For  the  Year  1794  ",  Vol.  ill.,  Boston, 
1810,  8°,  p.  75). 


The  Churches  of  Neiv  England  until  1641     365 

him,  a  Church  of  England  which,  to  be  sure,  lacked  the  dis- 
advantages of  the  hierarchy  of  archbishops  and  bishops,  but 
which  well  illustrated  the  relentless  bigotry  of  a  fully  de- 
veloped Puritanism.  Years  before,  Robert  Browne  had  fore- 
seen the  evil  possibilities  of  Puritan  ambition,  and  here  in  New 
England,  and  during  the  Commonwealth  in  Old  England,  his 
estimate  was  amply  proved  to  be  just. 

Roger  Williams  seems  to  have  been  the  first  New  England 
separatist  of  any  importance.  He  is  supposed  to  have  become 
an  Anabaptist,  but  apparently  not  an  immersionist,  in  1638, 
or  early  in  1639,  when  he  was  converted  to  Anabaptist  views, 
and  was  evidently  rebaptized  by  sprinkling  or  pouring  through 
the  agency  of  one  Holyman.  Then  Williams  "  rebaptized  him, 
and  some  ten  more."  Thus  was  organized  at  Providence,  Rhode 
Island,  what  is  now  supposed  to  have  been  the  first  non- 
immersionist  Anabaptist  church  in  America.  Williams,  how- 
ever, had  no  sooner  been  thus  baptized  than  he  became  doubtful 
of  the  validity  of  his  baptism,  and  three  months  later  is  said 
to  have  withdrawn  from  the  congregation,  and  to  have  become  a 
Seeker.  So  potent  did  he  deem  the  obstacles,  which  presented 
themselves  to  all  people  who  desired  a  complete  Reformation 
and  the  institution  of  new  churches. 

Once  more  we  may  turn  to  John  Cotton^ : — 

And  for  New-England,  there  is  no  such  Church  of  the  [rigid] 
Separation  at  al  that  I  know  of.  That  separate  Church  (if  it 
may  be  called  a  Church)  which  separated  with  Mr.  Williams,  first 
broke  into  a  division  about  a  small  occasion  (as  I  have  heard)  and 
then  broke  forth  into  Anabaptisme,  and  then  into  Antihaptisme, 
and  Familisme,  and  now  finally  [in  1647]  into  no  Church  at  all. 

This  citation,  if  true,  and  I  know  of  no  reason  for  doubting 
it,  makes  at  least  three  points  plain : — (1)  that  in  1647,  after 
the  dissolution  of  Williams'  church,  there  was  no  rigid  separatist 
congregation  in  all  New  England  (This  statement  includes  of 
course  the  church  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  at  Plymouth); 
(2)  that  the  continuous  history  of  the  present  immersionist 
First  Baptist  Church  in  Providence,  R.  I.,  cannot  begin  earlier 
than  1647,  while  it  probably  commences  somewhat  later;  and 

1  "The  Bloudy  Tenent,  Washed",  London,  1647  [second  section], 
p.  121. 


366  Early  English  Dissenters 

(3)  that  the  present  First  Baptist  Church  at  Newport,  R.  I., 
cannot  have  been  a  separatist,  or  an  Anabaptist  congregation 
before  1647. 

From  another  source  we  may  also  draw  two  further  inferences, 
viz.,  that  the  Baptist  Church  at  Newport,  R.  I.,  is  probably  the 
oldest  Baptist  church  in  America,  having  evidently  begun  to 
practise  immersion  about  1648  after  the  arrival  of  Marke 
Lucar  from  England ;  and  that  the  present  immersion ist  First 
Baptist  Church  of  Providence  probably  dates  back  to  the  same 
year,  when  baptism  by  "dipping"  may  have  been  procured 
through  the  agency  of  the  church  at  Newport^ 

Williams,  however,  though  disturbed  about  the  whole  subject 
of  baptism  was  not  satisfied  either  in  the  authority  for,  or  in  the 
manner  of,  dipping : — 

At  Seekonk  [he  says^]  a  great  many  have  lately  concurred  with 
Mr.  John  Clarke  and  our  Providence  men  about  the  point  of  a  new 
Baptism,  and  the  manner  by  dipping :  and  Mr.  John  Clarke  hath 
been  there  lately  (and  Mr.  Lucar)  and  hath  dipped  them.  I  believe 
their  practice  comes  nearer  the  first  practice  of  our  great  Founder 
Christ  Jesus,  then  other  practices  of  i-eligion  do,  and  yet  I  have  not 
satisfaction  neither  in  the  authority  by  which  it  is  done,  nor  in  the 
manner ;  nor  in  the  prophecies  concerning  the  rising  of  Christ's 
Kingdom  after  the  desolations  by  Rome,  &c.^  It  is  here  said  that 
the  Bay  hath  lately  decreed  to  prosecute  such,  and  hath  writ  to 
Plymouth  to  prosecute  at  Seekonk,  with  overtures  that  if  Plymouth 
do  not,  &c...* 

1  W.  H.  Wliitsitt's  "A  Question  in  Baptist  History",  Louisville, 
Kentucky,  1896,  pp.  156-8,  etc. 

2  "Publications  of  the  Narragansett  Club.  (First  Series.)  Vol.  VI", 
Providence,  RI.,  1874,  p.  188. 

3  These  words  show  that  already  Fifth  Monarchy  views  were  being 
propagated  among  the  early  American  Anabaptists. 

*  This  last  sentence  is  suggestive.  It  well  illustrates  the  coercive 
methods  which  might  be  used  upon  the  Plymouth  Colonists  by  the  Pres- 
byterian Puritans  of  Massachusetts  Bay  to  force  them  into  line,  so  to 
speak,  with  the  majority  of  New  England  settlers.  In  ways  like  this,  no 
doubt,  the  people  of  Plymouth  in  time  lost  any  individuality  which  they 
may  originally  have  had.  Perhaps,  however,  not  much  coercion  was 
sometimes  required.  In  another  letter  of  Roger  Williams,  contained  in 
the  volume  of  Narragansett  Club  Publications  mentioned  above,  p.  336, 
Williams  says  that  he  was  "  as  good  as  banished  from  Plymouth  as  from 
the  Massachusetts  ". 


The  Churches  of  New  England  imtil  1641     367 

Williams  is  said  never  to  have  joined,  or  organized,  another 
church,  but  to  have  kept  the  faith  of  a  Seeker  to  the  end, 
patiently  waiting  for  the  arrival  of  the  special  prophets  or 
apostles,  who  alone,  he  considered,  might  usher  in  the  much 
desired  new  Ecclesiastical  era,  but  who  in  his  opinion  never 
came. 


With  this  glimpse  of  the  views  held  by  the  founders  of 
New  England  we  may  pause  in  our  study  of  the  evolution 
of  English  Dissent  before  1641.  That  this  evolution  was  on 
the  whole  very  gradual,  appears  not  only  directly  from  the 
testimony  of  the  conventiclers  themselves,  but  also  from  that 
of  others  who  were  familiar  with  their  thoughts  and  activities. 
Many  surprises  await  the  investigator,  for  there  are  retro- 
gressions as  well  as  advances  recorded  in  this  period.  Only 
in  a  later  volume,  unfortunately,  can  we  illustrate  the  rapid 
expansion  and  the  approximate  completion  of  the  evolution 
of  the  early  English  separatist  movement.  We  may  close 
our  present  study  with  a  noteworthy  passage^  from  John 
Bastwick's  "  THE  |  UTTER  ROUTING  |  Of  the  whole  Army 
of  all  the  I  INDEPENDENTS  &  SECTARIES,  |  ...",  London, 
1646,  4-^  :— 

It  is  well  knowne  that  in  the  time  of  the  Prelats  power,  the 
removall  of  a  very  few  things  would  have  given  great  content 
unto  the  most  scrupulous  consciences :  for  I  my  selfe  can  speake 
thus  much,  not  only  concerning  the  conscientious  Professors  here 
in  England,  but  the  most  rigid  Separatists  beyond  the  Seas,  with 
many  of  which  I  had  familiar  acquaintance  at  home  and  abroad, 
and  amongst  all  that  ever  I  conversed  with,  I  never  heard  them 
till  within  these  twenty  yeares  desire  any  other  thing  in  Refor- 
mation, but  that  the  Ceremonies  might  be  removed  with  their 
Innovations,  and  that  Episcopacy  might  be  regulated,  and  their 
boundlesse  power  and  authority  taken  from  them,  and  that  the 
extravagances  of  the  High  Commission  Court  might  be  anihilated, 
and  made  void,  and  that  there  mightthrough  [sic]  the  Kingdom 
be  a  preaching  Ministery  every  where  set  up.  This  was  all  that 
the  most  that  I  was  then  acquainted  with  desired  in  the  Refor- 
mation of  Church  matters.  Indeed  within  this  sixteene  yeares  I 
met  with  some  that  desired  a  more  full  Reformation,  and  yet  if 
they  might  have  injoyed  but  that  I  now  mentioned,  they  would 

1  In  "  The  Antiloqvie  ",  sigs.  f  verso  and  io  recto. 


368  Early  English  Dissenters 

have  beene  very  thankfull  to  God  and  authority,  and  have  sate 
downs  quietly.  But  yet  I  say  the  extreamest  extent  of  their 
desires,  reached  but  to  the  removall  of  all  the  Ceremonies  and 
Innovations,  the  taking  away  of  the  Service  Booke,  and  the  putting 
downe  of  the  High  Commission  Court  (which  was  called  the  court 
Christian,  though  it  was  rather  Pagan)  and  the  removall  of  the 
Hierarchy,  root  and  branch,  and  the  setting  up,  and  establishing 
of  a  godly  Presbyterie  through  the  Kingdome ;  this  was  I  say  all 
and  the  uttermost  Reformation  that  was  required  hy  the  most  scru- 
pulous m,en  then  living  that  I  knew ;  yea,  I  can  speake  thus  much 
in  the  presence  of  God,  that  Master  Robinson  o/"  Leiden,  the  Pastor 
of  the  Brownist  Church,  there  told  mee  and  others,  who  are  yet  living 
to  witnesse  the  truth  of  tvhat  I  now  say,  that  if  hee  7night  in  England 
have  injoyed  hut  the  liberty  of  his  Ministry  there,  with  an  immunity 
but  from  the  very  Ceremonies,  and  that  they  had  not  forced  hhn  to 
a  subscrijition  to  them,  and  imposed  upon  him  the  observation  of 
them,  that  hee  had  never  separated  from  it,  or  left  that  Church..} 

^  For  further  information  on  Robinson's  separation  from  the  Church  of 
England  see  the  author's  "^  Tercentenary  Memorial  New  Facts  concerning 
John  Robinson  Pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers",  Oxford  and  London,  1910, 
pp.  16-31. 


APPENDIX  A 

AN   ADDITIONAL   NOTE   CONCERNING   THE   BOOK 
ENTITLED,    "  TRUTH's    CHAMPION  " 

Thus  far  my  search  for  a  copy  of  "Ti-uth's  Champion"  has  been 
in  vain.  Fortunately,  however,  I  have  noticed  that  both  Stinton 
and  Crosby  give  more  complete  descriptions  of  this  work  than  I  had 
obtained  elsewhere,  and  accordingly,  the  original  statement  by 
Stinton  may  here  be  cited  as  follows^ : — 

"Altho'  this  Man  [lohn  Morton]  might  after  his  return  from 
Holland,  stay  sometime  at  London  w""  M'  Helwisse  &  his  Church. 
Yet  there  appears  a  probability  of  his  Setling  afterwards  in  y* 
Country  &  preaching  to  Some  People  there  :  for  at  y'^  begining  [?] 
of  y*^  Civil  Warrs,  when  they  were  demolishing  an  old  Wall  near 
Colchester,  there  was  found  hid  in  it  y*^  Copye  of  a  Book,  writen  by 
1.  Morton  supposed  to  be  y"  Same  Person ;  The  General  Baptists 
were  very  fond  of  it,  soon  got  it  printed,  &.  it  has  since  received 
several  Impressions  :  y**  Author  of  this  book  appears  to  have  been  a 
Man  of  Considerable  Learning  &,  Parts,  One  y'  Understood  y*^ 
Oriental  Languages  <t  was  acquainted  w^''  y«  vVrightings  of  y*^ 
Fathers;  but  a  very  Zealous  Remonstrant  or  Armenian  :  its  intituled 
Truths  ChampioH,  ife  contains  13.  Chapters  on  y'=  following  heads. 
(1.)  of  Christs  dying  for  all.  (2).  of  his  dying  for  all  to  save  all. 
(3.)  of  y'^  Power  of  God  in  Christ  given  out  unto  all  Men.  (4)  of 
Predestination.  (5)  of  Election.  (6)  of  Free-will.  (7)  of  Falling 
away  (8)  of  Original  Sin  (9)  of  Baptism.  (10)  of  f  Ministry  (11)  of 
Love.  (12)  of  those  that  hold  that  God  hath  appointed  all  y«  Actions 
of  Men,  and  y"  sad  Effects  y'  follow.  (13)  of  y«  Man  Adam  and  y« 
Man  Christ.  It  is  writ  in  a  very  good  stile,  &  the  Arguments  are 
managed  w'**  a  great  deal  of  Art  tfe  Insinuation,  So  that  those  who 
follow  y®  Remonstrant's  scheem  of  Doctrines  did  not  value  it  with- 
out a  Cause." 

Crosby  published  this  passage  with  a  few  slight  changes  in  'The 
History  of  the  English  Baptistn,  Vol.  i.,  pp.  277-8.  Stinton  h;id 
evidently  seen  the  book.  His  description  iippears  to  me  to  make 
our  Murton's  authorship  rather  improbable.  Evidently  the  problem 
can  only  be  solved  alter  a  copy  of  "Truth's  Champion"  has  been 
found. 

1  "An  Account  of  Some  |  of  the  |  Most  Eminent  &  Leading  Men 
among  the  |  Engli.sh  Antipajdobaptists.  |  ...",  pp.  12-1.3. 

R  24 


370  Early  English  Dissenters 


APPENDIX  B 

AN  ADDITIONAL  NOTE  RELATING  TO  "A  VERY  PLAIN  AND 
WELL    GROUNDED    TREATISE    CONCERNING    BAPTISME " 

Recently  I  have  fortunately  come  across  a  passage  which  seems 
to  contain  a  reference  to  an  earlier  edition  of  this  work  than  I  have 
seen,  published  in  or  before  1620,  and  accordingly  1618  may  after 
all  have  been  the  definite  date  of  the  edition  which  Dr  William 
Wall  saw  two  hundred  years  ago.  The  words  to  which  I  refer  are 
the  following  :  "  besides  all  which  I  haue  not  long  since,  seeiie  a  Booke 
translated  out  of  Duch  and  Printed  in  English,  proouing  that  the 
inuention  of  Infants  ba])tism.e,  was  brought  in ;  and  Decreed  by 
diuers  Emperors,  Popes,  and  Counsels ; . . . "  ^  In  case  this  passage  does 
have  reference  to  such  an  earlier  edition  of  this  work,  the  edition  of 
which  I  give  a  facsimile  was  really  a  later  reprint,  in  which  that 
fact  is  not  mentioned.  There  is  apparently  no  doubt  that  the 
pamphlet  which  I  have  seen  was  published  after  1640.  To  make 
perfectly  certain  of  this  point,  I  have  submitted  my  facsimile  to  an 
expert  bibliographer,  Mr  Alfred  W.  Pollard,  who  agrees  with  me 
herein.  That  thei'e  were  two  editions  of  this  work,  I  believe,  has 
been  hitherto  unsuspected.  This  theory  very  readily  explains  how 
Dr  Wall  came  to  assign  a  definite  date  to  the  pamphlet  which  he 
sav/,  and  also  how  it  happened  that  Thomas  Cobbet  did  not  reply  to 
the  work  until  1648.  In  reality  he  seems  to  have  replied  promptly  to 
the  second  impression.  I  now  know  of  four  copies  of  the  reprint,  to 
one  of  which  the  date  1645  and  to  another  of  which  a  date  between 
1645  and  1650,  if  I  remember  correctly,  had  already  been  assigned. 


APPENDIX   C 

THE    LATEST    DISCOVERY    RELATING   TO    JOHN 
WILKINSON 

Mr  Walter  H.  Burgess  in  his  recently  published  "John  Smith 
the  Se-Baptist",  London,  1911,  mentions  the  existence  of  a  post- 
humous pamphlet  of  John  Wilkinson's,  which  on  examination  I  have 
found  to  contain  more  interesting  views  of  his  than  have  thus  far 
been  discovered.  The  book  appears  to  be  an  unique  copy.  Wilkin- 
son's style  of  expression  as  here  exemplified  is  less  vehement  than 
that  of  Browne,  Barrowe,  and  some  other  early  separatists,  but  some 

1  [John  Murton's]  "  A  |  DISCRIPTION  |  OF  WHAT  GOD  |  hath 
Predestinated  \  ...",  1620,  8°,  p.  154.  Mr  Burgess  in  his  "John  Smith  the 
Se-Bai^tist",  London,  1911,  pp.  310-11,  has  independently  noticed  this 
same  reference. 


John  Wilkinson's  '"Exposition"  371 

of  the  positions  maintained  distinctly  remind  one  of  passages  which 
occur  in  Browne's  books.  As  the  writings  of  John  Wilkinson  are 
less  known  than  those  of  practically  any  other  of  the  prominent 
early  Brownist  or  Barrowist  leaders,  the  following  title  of  this  work 
and  a  few  of  the  best  citations  from  it  should  prove  of  interest 
and  value : — 

"AN  I  EXPOSITION  |  OF  THE  13.  CHAPTER  OP  THE  | 
REVELATION  OF  lESVS  |  CHRIST.  |  By  lohn  Wilkinson.  \ 
[Device]  |  Revelation  14.  9.  |  KncL  the  S.  Angel  followed  them,  saying 
with  a  lowd  |  voice,  If  any  man  worship)  the  beast  and  his  image,  and 
re-\ceive  his  niarke  in  his  forehead,  or  in  his  hand,  \  V.  10.  The 
same  shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of  God,  \  which  is  poivred 
out  without  mixture  into  the  cuji  of  his  indig-  \  nation,  and  he  shalbe 
tormented  with  fire  and  brimstone  in  the  |  presence  of  the  holy  Angels, 
and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb:  \  V.  11.  And  the  smoake  of  their 
torment  ascendeth  up  for  ever  \  arid  ever.  \  [Device]  j  Imprinted  in  the 
yere,  1619."     4^',  pp.  37. 

'2'  teas  the  purpose  and  desire  of  the  Authour  of  this 
Treatise  to  haue  published  his  Judgment  of  the 
\whole  booke  of  the  Revelation,  But  through  the 
^malice  of  the  Prelates  who  divers  tim^s  spoyled  him 
of  his  goods,  and  kept  him  many  yeres  in  prison; 
Jie  was  prevented  of  his  purpose.  After  his  death 
'Some  of  his  labours  comniing  to  the  hands  of  his 
friends,  in  scattred  and  unperfect  papers  ;  they  labotired  with  the  help 
of  otliers  that  heard  him  declare  his  judgement  herein,  to  set  forth  this 
little  treatise,  wherin  they  have  not  varied  from  the  Authours  Judge- 
ment, but  onely  in  one  point  in  the  3.  verse,... the  which  should  not 
haue  been  altered,  if  the  worke  had  been  left  perfect."  ^ 

"As  the  mouth  is  the  meanes  and  instrument  whereby  men  do 
declare  their  mindes,  so  this  Beast  had  a  mouth  to  declare  and  utter 
her  minde;  by  which  mouth  was  signified  a  Ministerie  of  false  Pro- 
phets, and  lying  Spirits,  namely.  Doctors,  Schoole-men,  Monkes, 
Fryars,  and  all  sorts  of  their  Preachei'S,  who  teach  for  doctrines  the 
commandements  of  the  Beast,  and  declare  and  utter  the  minde  and 
will  of  the  Beast  as  being  equall  to  Gods  Word,  this  their  Canons, 
Lawes,  Books  and  Monuments,  do  manifestly  witnesse  :  The  efiect 
of  that  which  this  mouth  uttereth  is  noted  to  be,  great  things,  and 
blasphemies.  They  boast  of  this  Beast  that  she  is  the  holy  Catholick 
Church  Militant,  the  Mother  of  all  true  beleevers,  the  chaste  Spouse 
of  Christ,  the  Pillar  and  ground  of  Truth,  that  it  cannot  erre,  ic, 
And  that  all  which  will  have  God  to  be  their  Father,  must  haue  her 
to  be  their  Mother;  Finally,  that  out  of  her  lap  and  communion 
there  is  no  saluation.  These,  and  many  other  such  great  things 
speaketh  the  mouth  of  this  Beast,  which  are  indeed  great  things, 

'  Verso  of  the  title-page. 


372  Early  English  Dissenters 

and  being  so  spoken  are  great  blasphemies  :  For  is  it  not  great 
blasphemy  to  call  that  Holy,  which  is  most  abominable?  To  call 
her  the  Mother  of  all  true  Beleevers,  which  is  the  Mother  of  fornica- 
tions, and  of  all  abominations  ?  To  call  that  the  Pillar  and  ground 
of  Truth,  which  hath  corrupted  the  earth  with  her  errours  and 
fornications  and  caused  all  Nations  to  drinke  of  the  wine  of  the 
wrath  thereof  1  To  say  there  is  no  saluation  but  in  her  fellowship 
whose  end  and  iudgement  is  to  go  to  destruction  ?  Beware  of  false 
Prophets,  and  teachers  of  lyes,  for  such  are  the  mouth  of  this 
Beast." ' 

"And  as  they  blaspheme  the  name  of  God;  So  likewise  they 
blaspheme  his  Tabernacle,  That  is  to  say,  the  true  visible  Church  of 
Christ  vnder  the  Gospel,  which  is  the  place  of  Gods  presence,  which 
he  hath  chosen  to  put  his  name  there,  *[From  margin  :  *Math.  18.] 
where  two  or  three  or  more  are  gathered  together  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  there  is  Christ  present,  and  where  Christ  is  present  there 
hath  God  put  his  name,  there  he  is  to  be  sought ;  and  there  hee  may 
bee  found,  and  there  is  his  Tabernacle.  To  come  together  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  is  when  Gods  people  ioyne  themselues  together  in  a 
spirituall  body  politicke,  separated  from  the  common  multitudes  of 
knowne  unbeleevers,  to  the  end  to  meete  together  for  the  mutuall 
edification  and  comfort  one  of  anothei",  by  doctrine,  breaking  of 
bread  and  prayer,  and  to  practise  all  other  Ordinances  of  Christ 
set  downe  in  his  Testament,  as  they  shall  haue  occasion :  and  to 
companies  of  Beleeuers,  hauing  such  fellowship  and  communion  one 
with  another,  the  title  of  the  Churches  of  Christ  doth  (in  our  use  of 
speech)  properly  and  of  right  belong  :  but  for  beleevers  to  doe  this 
apart  by  themselues  is  adiudged  contempt  of  authority,  factious, 
novelty,  making  of  Conventicles  and  unlawfuU  Assemblies,  dangerous 
to  the  State,  and  not  to  be  sufiFered  in  any  Kingdome  or  Common- 
wealth, and  so  they  blaspheme  the  Tabernacle  of  God  in  a  high 
degree,  as  if  Gods  people  were  a  company  of  ungodly  rebels,  and 
wicked  conspirators ;  but  the  righteous  Lord  will  in  due  time  visit 
his  people,  &  rebuke  his  enemies. 

"And  on  the  other  side,  for  Gods  people  now  to  deny  the  kingdome 
of  the  Beast ;  that  is,  (as  they  call  it)  the  holy  Catholick  church 
Militant,  to  be  the  true  Church  of  Christ:  To  refuse  to  partake  and 
communicate  with  them  in  their  abominations,  delusions,  and 
unfruitfuU  workes  of  darknesse,  is  adjudged  disobedience,  schisme 
and  contempt  of  the  power  and  authoritie  of  the  Church :  To  speak 
against  their  proceedings,  sedition,  disturbance  of  the  peace  of  the 
Church,  heresie,  impietie,  and  what  not?  Thus  they  adorne  the 
Harlott,  which  corrupteth  the  earth  with  her  fornications,  with  the 
title  of  the  Church,  and  spouse  of  Christ,  and  Tabernacle  of  God; 
And  so  blaspheme  the  Tabernacle  of  God,  as  if  it  were  not  a 
communion  of  Saincts  by  calling  and  profession,  but  an  habitation 

1  P.  12. 


John  Wilkinson's  ''Exposition''  373 

of  Divells,  an  hold  of  Fowle  spirits,  and  a  cage  of  every  uncleane 
&  hateful!  bird."^ 

"  The  X  [From  margin :  "  J  For  proofs  of  this  looks  no  further 
then  in  the  36.  Canon  of  the  Church  of  Eng.  made  An.  1603."] 
Prelacye  and  Clergy  being  as  hath  been  before  shewed,  assembled 
with  authority  to  make  lawes,  did  ordeyne  that  every  Bishop  in 
his  diocesse  should  carefully  observe  that  none  should  preach  or 
execute  the  function  of  a  parish  Parson,  Vicar  or  Curat  in  any 
parish,  but  he  that  should  sweare  to  observe  their  Lawes  & 
Canons,... and  therfore  to  what  parish  soever  these  tryed  Lads  are 
sent  to  doe  service,  upon  sight  of  this  Marke  [the  Bishop's  "Letters 
of  Orders"]  they  must  be  received  without  any  opposition,  upon 
penaltie  of  the  Law  upon  those  that  shall  refuse  them. 

"Here  may  be  objected,  that  this  Marke  is  onely  received  by  the 
Clergie,  and  not  by  the  people  of  all  sorts,  rich  and  poore,  bond  and 
free,  according  to  the  Text.  I  answer,  that  all  persons  which  receiue 
these  false  Priests  doe  likewise  receiue,  and  submit  to  that  authority 
which  sent  them,  and  also  the  Marke  by  which  they  are  sent,  as  is 
evident,  when  a  Priest  commeth  to  take  possession  of  a  Parish  to 
which  he  is  by  the  Bishop  appointed;  he  is  not  received  upon  his 
word,  nor  because  he  tolleth  the  Bell,  and  putteth  on  the  Surplice, 
and  useth  other  Ceremonies  inioyned  him  by  the  Prelate;  But, 
shewing  the  fore-said  Marke  of  the  Beast  they  receiue  both  him  and 
it,  and  communicate  with  him:  Thus  all,  both  small  and  great,  rich 
and  poore,  bond  and  free,  that  receiue  and  submit  unto  their 
appointed  Priest,  receiue  a  marke  in  their  foreheads,... those  that 
receiue,  heare,  and  ioyne  in  fellowship  with  these  false  Ministers, 
doe  heare,  receiue,  and  ioyne  to  the  false  power  which  sent  them, 
and  the  marke  by  which  they  are  sent."^ 

"As  for  the  best  sort  of  their  parish  Preists  which  are  men  of 
learning  and  gifts,  they  must  also  be  confined  within  their  limitts, 
they  must  worship  God  according  to  the  rules  prescribed  them 
by  these  their  spirituall  Fathers,  as  in  the  38.  Canon.  If  any 
minister  shall  omitt  to  use  the  forme  of  Prayer,  or  any  of  the  orders 
or  Ceremonies  prescribed  in  the  Communion  Booke,  let  him  he 
suspended,  and  If  he  doe  not  conforme  within  the  space  of  a  moneth, 
let  him  be  deposed.  The  absurdities  and  blasphemies  conteyned  in 
that  Comon  prayer  Booke  are  many,  which  having  been  discovered 
and  layd  open  by  divers  treatises  already  published  in  print,  I  will 
omit,  onely  this  I  will  add,  that  in  the  imposing  of  that  service 
Booke,  or  any  other,  this  great  iniquitie  is  committed  by  the  imposers 
therof ;  That  they  doe  exalt  themselves  both  against  Christ,... and 
also... against  the  holy  Ghost,... Further  their  preachers  may  not 
teach  against  their  corrupt  Church  state  and  Ministrie,  though  they 
know  it   to   be   Antichristian,  nor  against    the   forme   of   worship 

1  Pp.  15-16.  2  Pp.  24-25. 

24—3 


374  Early  Eiiglish  Dissenters 

prescribed  in  the  said  comon  prayer  Booke,  nor  against  the 
ceremonies,  nor  the  goverment  of  the  church  of  England  by 
Archbishops,  Bishops,  Deanes,  Archdeacons,  and  the  rest  that  beare 
office  in  the  same,  nor  against  the  manner  and  forme  of  making  and 
consecrating  Bishops  Preists  or  Deacons,  nor  against  the  Lawes  and 
Ordinances  Ecclesiasticall  established  in  the  sayd  Church,  whosoever 
transgresseth  in  these  things,  shalbe  excommunicated  ijjso  facto,  as 
is  playne  in  the  4  6.  7.  8.  &  54.  Canons.  Thus  by  excommunicating 
and  cursing  they  labour  to  mainteine  and  defend  their  corruptions, 
but  not  one  iote  of  Scripture  dare  they  shew,  and  no  marvell ;  seeing 
the  whole  scriptures  are  against  mens  inventions  and  traditions,  of 
which  nature  these  abuses  are,  being  left  here  by  the  Pope,  and 
reteyned  and  renewed  by  his  Prelates.  As  they  may  not  teach 
against  these  things,  so  on  the  contrarie,  they  may  not  teach  the 
true  and  right  way  which  Christ  hath  prescribed  in  his  Testament, 
how  we  must  worship  God,  nor  how  the  true  Church  of  Christ 
ought  to  be  gathered  and  constituted,  the  Ministers  thereof  ordained, 
nor  the  manner  how  it  ought  to  bee  governed,  as  appeareth  in  the 
9.  10.  11.  and  12.  Canons.  By  which  we  may  see  in  what  bondage 
their  Preachers  are  kept,  they  must  hide  their  Talent  in  the  earth, 
and  put  their  candle  under  a  Bushell,  lest  men  by  the  light  thereof 
should  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  and  beleeue  it.  Also  it 
is  to  be  observed  as  a  generall  rule,  that  none,  good  or  bad,  learned 
or  unlearned,  can  be  suffered  to  receiue  their  Orders  of  Priesthood 
or  Deaconship,  or  be  admitted  to  preach,  or  execute  a  Ministerie 
in  their  Parish  Churches,  unlesse  they  sweare  to  conforme  to  the 
worship  and  ceremonies  prescribed  by  these  Prelates,  and  also  submit 
to  their  Antichristian  rule  and  governement,  which  they  challenge 
to  themselues,  as  being  Lords  over  all :  Thus  by  swearing  they  make 
their  inferiour  Priests  to  sell  themselues  to  work  wickednesse;  which 
trick  they  haue  cunningly  devised  to  bring  the  Land  in  subjection 
to  their  Antichristian  yoke:  And  upon  the  taking  of  this  Oath  they 
receiue  the  Prelates  Marke,  which  is  called  in  this  Chapter,  the 
Marke  of  the  Beast ;  which  is  understood  to  be  the  Letters  of  Orders 
under  the  Prelates  hand  and  seale  to  testifie  that  they  are  made 
Priests  or  Deacons,  according  to  the  order  and  canons  prescribed 
in  that  behalf e  in  this  their  Convocation,  as  wee  may  see  in  the 
36.  48.  and  50.  Canons:  And  for  refusing  to  worship  them  in  these 
things,  many  are  put  back,  and  those  that  formerly  haue  been 
ordeyned,  for  refusing  so  to  doe  (which  they  call  revolting)  haue 
had  their  penall  Lawes  executed  upon  them,  which  is  Suspension, 
Degredation,  and  Excommunication,  and  after  these  many  other 
afflictions  in  body,  goods  and  name;  being  accounted  factious  and 
seditious  persons,  that  haue  no  right  to  buy  or  sell  their  wares."  ^ 

"  Now  if  we  compare  the  Church  of  England  with  these  Scriptures, 
we  shall  finde  that  the  practise  and  proceedings  thereof,  hath  been, 

J  Pp.  32-33. 


John  Wilkinson's  ''Exposition"  375 

and  is  contrary.  The  people  thereof  (for  the  most  part)  are  such  as 
visibly  and  apparently  Hue  in  all  kinde  of  licentiousnesse,  and  in 
their  workes  deny  God,  being  abominable  and  disobedient.  For 
these  Lordly  Prelates  being  armed  with  the  sword  of  Civill  authority, 
and  having  the  Law  of  [on]  their  side,  they  haue  not  laboured  by 
painefull  preaching  to  draw  men  to  the  obedience  of  the  faith,  and 
to  the  fellowship  of  the  Gospell  apart  from  the  prophane  and  wicked, 
that  speake  cvill  of  the  wayes  of  the  Lord,  but  they  haue  compelled 
and  inforced  all  sorts  of  people,  both  religious  and  prophane,  not 
onely  such  as  feare  God,  but  also  such  as  feiire  him  not,  by  bodily 
punishments  to  be  conformable  to  the  profession  which  is  by  tlieir 
Canon  Law  established  in  this  Church :  As  if  the  Word  of  God,  that 
Sword  of  the  Spirit  were  not  mighty  enough  in  operation  for  the 
gathering  together  of  the  Saints.  That  this  is  their  practise  is  plaine 
by  the  90.  and  114.  Canons,  where  it  is  said,  that  Ministers  and 
Church-wardens  must  present  all  persons  aboue  the  age  of  13.  yeeres, 
that  come  not  to  the  Church  and  receiue  the  Sacraments;  after 
which  presentation,  if  they  doe  not  conforme  they  shall  bee  ex- 
communicated, imprisoned,  and  haue  their  goods  attached :  This  is 
the  meanes  which  hath  been  used  for  the  gathering  of  this  Church 
of  England,  whereby  they  haue  confounded  and  mingled  them 
together  whom  God  hath  commanded  to  be  separated :...  But  this 
hath  been  the  manner  of  gathering  the  Church  of  England,  and 
therefore  it  is  unworthy  to  be  adorned  with  the  title  of  the  Church 
of  Christ,  but  ought  to  be  accounted  the  Image  of  the  first  Beast 
before  spoken  of,.... 

"  And  for  confirmation  hereof  by  the  testimonie  of  their  own 
mouthes,  let  us  but  consider  the  estimation  which  the  members  of 
this  Church  haue  one  of  another:  Some  there  are  amongst  them, 
who  for  making  more  conscience  of  their  waies  then  the  rest,  are  in 
derision  called  Puritans  or  Precisians ;  these  on  the  contrary  seeing 
the  ungodly  conversation  of  the  rest  of  their  brethi-en,  esteeme  them 
as  wicked,  prophane,  carnall  and  unregenerate  men,  such  as  (for 
the  most  part)  are  mockers,  contemners,  and  evill  speakers  of  the 
Truth,  and  in  whom  is  no  appearance  of  Religion  and  the  feare  of 
God;    and   therefore  they  distinguish   the  better    sort    from    these 

prophane  persons  by  the  name  of  Professors I  deny  not  but  there 

are  many  amongst  them,  that  are  the  Saints  and  Servants  of  Christ, 
that  are  godly  and  zealous  people,... Such  persons  (I  say)  are  fit 
stones  for  the  building  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  but  so  long  as  they 
remaine  in  this  confusion,  they  can  no  more  bee  said  to  be  the  true 
visible  Church  of  Christ,  then  a  heape  of  stones  fitted  for  a  building 
can  bee  said  to  be  a  house;  therefore  they  must  be  separated  from 
the  wicked,  and  placed  together  according  to  the  order  prescribed 
by  Christ  lesus,  and  practised  by  his  Apostles,  as  in  the  new 
Testament,  before  they  can  be  so  esteemed."^ 

1  Pp.  34-35. 


376  Early  English  Dissenters 


APPENDIX   D 

THE    WILL    OF    ANN   ROBINSON,    MOTHER   OF   JOHN 
ROBINSON,    PASTOR    OF    THE    PILORIM    FATHERS 

"In^  the  name  of  God  Amen  the  sixtenth  day  of  October  in  the 
yeare  of  our  Lord  God  1616  I  Ann  Robinson  of  Sturton  [le  Steeple] 
in  the  Oountye  of  Nottingham  widdowe  beinge  aged  and  weake 
in  bodye  but  whole  and  sound  in  mynd  but  of  good  and  pej-fect 
remembrance  thankes  be  to  Allmightye  God  And  prayeinge  and 
consideringe  the  instabilitye  of  this  vaine  and  transatorye  world 
and  the  shortnesse  of  mannes  liefe  therein  Doe  ordaine  and  make 
this  my  laste  Will  and  Testament  clearly  revokeinge  and  absolutely 
admyttinge  hereby  all  and  everye  former  will  and  testament  by  me 
in  any  wise  heretofore  made  in  manner  and  forme  followinge  That 
is  to  saye  firste  and  principally  into  the  handes  of  allmightye  Godd 
my  creator  Redemer  and  Sanctifier  I  commend  my  soule  assurdly 
hopeinge  and  trustinge  in  and  by  the  merittes  death  and  passion  of 
his  deare  sonne  Jesus  Christ  my  onely  lord  and  saviour  to  be  one 
of  his  electe  and  blessed  companye  in  the  Kingdom  of  heaven  and 
by  noe  other  waye  or  means  whatsoever  And  my  body  I  committ  to 
the  earth  to  be  interred  or  buried  in  the  parishe  churche  of  Sturton 
aforesaid  or  elsewheare  it  shall  please  god  to  call  me  to  his  mercye 
Item  I  give  and  bequeathe  unto  the  poore  peorple  \sic\  of  Sturton  and 
Ferton  forty  shillings  of  lawful  money  of  England  to  be  given  and 
bestowed  at  my  f  unerall  at  the  disposeinge  of  my  son  in  law  William 
Pearte  Item  I  give  unto  my  sonne  lohn  my  sonne  and  heire  apparent 
the  some  of  forty  shillinge*'  of  lyke  lawfull  money  of  England  Item 
I  give  and  bequeathe  unto  Bridgett  Robinson  Wife  to  my  said  sonne 
John  one  paire  of  lynneinge  sheets  and  one  silver  spoone  Item  I 
give  and  bequeath  to  lohn  Robinson  sonne  of  my  said  sonne  John 
the  some  of  forty  shillinges  and  to  every  one  of  my  said  sonne  John 
his  children  the  some  of  xx^  Item  I  give  and  bequeathe  unto  my 

'  At  the  District  Probate  Registry,  York,  Vol.  34.  This  will  was 
recently  discovered  by  Rev.  Walter  H.  Burgess,  B.A("John  Smith  the 
Se-Baptist",  London,  1911,  p.  317).  It  finally  and  definitely  locates  the 
home  and  probable  birthplace  of  John  Robinson,  and  indicates  the  kind 
of  family  in  which  he  grew  up,  viz.,  that  of  a  modest  gentleman  farmer 
of  the  period.  Mr  Burgess  deserves  much  credit  for  making  this 
interesting  discovery,  since  the  difficulties  which  beset  any  investigator 
were  very  great  and  indeed  appeared  almost  insurmountable.  The  finding 
of  this  definite  information  disposes  of  the  conjectures  of  over  half  a 
century. 


The  Will  of  John  Robinson's  Mother      377 

said  Sonne  John  Robinson  all  the  pailes  Railes  stoupes  gates  [?]  and 
all  fences  round  about  the  messuage  or  Coftestad  wherein  I  now 
dwell  with.  [?]  all  and  singular  rackes  and  maingeres  beastes  houses 
and  ploucher<?s  yfith  [?]  all  the  glass  about  the  said  messuage  to  remain 
and  be  to  him  and  his  heires  for  ever  Item  I  give  and  bequeath  unto 
Ellen  my  sonne  William  his  Wife  one  paire  of  lynninge  sheets  and 
a  silver  spoone  and  to  every  one  of  his  children  Twenty  shillinges 
Item  I  give  unto  foure  of  the  children  of  my  Sonne  in  lawe  William 
Pearte  that  is  to  say  to  William  Thomas  Originall  and  John  Pearte 
every  of  them  the  some  of  xx^  Item  I  give  and  bequeathe  unto 
M""  Charles  White  of  Sturton  ten  shillinges  And  I  appoint  and  make 
him  (as  I  trust  he  will  be)  to  be  ^w^evintendent  and  overseer  of  this 
my  said  last  Will  and  Testament  Item  I  give  and  bequeathe  to  Mary 
my  daugliter  and  Wife  to  the  said  William  Pearte  all  my  weareinge 
apparell  wolle^i  and  lynnen  Item  I  give  and  bequeath  to  John 
Robson  11^  and  vj**  Item  unto  Jone  Green's  Servantes  other  two 
shillinge.s  and  six  pence  Item  I  give  and  bequeath  unto  my  saide 
Sonne  William  Robinson  my  dehies  legacies  and  funerall  expenses 
paid  and  discharged  and  all  and  singular  the  moyte  and  halfe  parte 
of  all  my  goodes  cattalles  and  chattlles  quicke  and  deade  moveable 
and  unmoveable  of  what  kynde  quantitye  or  qualitye  soever  [?]  they 
be  and  unbequeathed  And  I  make  and  ordaine  my  said  sonne  in 
lawe  William  Pearte  my  sole  Executor  of  this  my  last  Will  and 
Testament  And  doe  give  and  bequeathe  unto  the  said  William  Pearte 
all  and  singular  the  other  moyte  and  halfe  of  all  my  said  Goodes 
Cattails  and  chattells  quicke  and  deade  moveable  and  unraovable 
of  what  kynde  [1]  quantitye  or  qualitye  soever  [?]  they  be  and 
unbequeathed  In  Wituesse  whereoif  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand 
and  seale  the  daye  and  yeare  first  above  written  These  beinge 
Witnesses  George  Dickons  Rob'  Byshoppe  George  Halton. 

10.  «'  On  the  Sixteenth  day  of  lanuary  1616[/17J 

Probate  of  this  Will  was  granted  by 
the  Exchequer  Court  of  York  to 
William  Pearte  the  sole  Executor  "  ^ 

1  The  text  of  this  will  here  given  was  made  for  me  at  the  District 
Probate  Registry,  York. 


378  Early  English  Dissenters 


APPENDIX    E 

DID    ANY    ENGLISH    GENERAL    ANABAPTIST    PRACTISE 
IMMERSION   BEFORE    1641  ? 

This  question,  I  think,  must  be  answered  in  the  affirmative,  but 
thus  far  only  one  passage  has  been  found  to  demonstrate  that  fact. 
This  information  is  found  in  the  second  part  of  William  Britten's 
"Moderate  Baptist"^,  1654,  and  reads  in  its  context  as  follows^: — 

"  Ba7rTio-[T]»;pioi',  BapfAsterium,  that  vessel  for  sprinkling  or 
washing,  callad  [called]  a  Font,  wee  read  not  of  in  Scripture,  it  being 
another  of  their  inventions.  And  for  the  further  information  of 
the  manner,  note  the  word  BaTrn'^o),  immergo,  to  plunge,  dip,  in,  or 
overwhelm  ;...Thus  in  the  command  of  Christ  they  forsake  him  the 
fountain,  and  hev/  to  themselves  a  broken  Cistern. 

"  Object.  Some  object,  that  now  there  ought  to  be  no  water- 
baptism,  neither  of  Infants  nor  Beleevers,  alledging  that  the  Or- 
dinance is  ceased,  for  want  of  a  succession  of  Administrators  from 
the  Primitive  times;  in  which  they  produce  the  Churches  flight  into 
the  wildernesse  [Hev.  13.  6],  to  be  fed  tliere  one  thousand  two 
hundred  and  threescore  dayes,  which  are  taken  Prophetically  for  so 
many  yeares,  and  that  time  Antichrist  had  the  power,  when  Popes, 
Popish  Bishops,  and  Priests  tyrannized  over  the  Saints,  who  then 
solely  exercised  the  Authority  of  Chvirch-administration  in  publike, 
not  suffering  a  Saint  to  appeare  in  a  right  Gospel-manner;  and 
then  the  holy  City  (being  the  Church  of  Christ)  to  be  troden  under 
foot. 

"  Before  I  answer  this,  note  thus  much ;  That  these  Objecters 
doe  not  all  of  them  deny  Baptism  to  beleevers  with  water,  but  say 
the  way  to  Baptism  is  cut  off,  by  means  a  succession  of  Baptizers 
did  not  continue  in  those  persecuting  times,  and  so  no  man  hath 
that  Authority  to  baptize  with  water,  until  Christ  restores  the  same 
by  such  a  messenger  as  shall  be  immediately  called  by  himselfe. 

"  Ans.  It  is  hard  to  prove  a  succession  of  Administrators  in 
a  Gospel-way ;  for  the  enemy  having  power  a  long  time,  then  the 
poore  Saints  durst  write  little  to  keep  it  upon  records,  when 
themselves  were  persecuted  from  City  to  City,... Yet  I  question  not 
but  there  was  a  Church  continued  under  the  same  ordinances, 
although  obscure  and  hid  from  the  eyes  of  the  world,  as  you  may 
see,  although  the  woman  (the  Church)  was  in  the  wildernesse 
[Eev.  12.  G],  yet  she  dyed  not  there,  but  was  fed  of  God;. ..So  it 
appeares  God  had  a  Church  then. 


'  What  is  believed  to  be  an  unique  copy  of  this  work  is  in  the  author's 
collection. 

2  Pp.  65-67. 


An  Immersionist  Anabaptist  before  1041     379 

"  Although  the  right  Gospel  frame  did  not  visibly  ai)peare  to 
the  world  in  the  time  of  Popery,  Prelacy  and  Presbytery,  so  that 
great  Congregations  could  not  be  gathered ;  yet  if  but  two  or  three, 
Christ  hath  promised  to  be  amongst  them,  (as  a  Church  in  his  name) 
...yet  this  woman  (the  Cliurch)  was  nourished  from  the  face  of  the 
Serpent  (those  persecutors)  during  which  wildernesse  estate  of  Gods 
people,  they  had  comfort  and  light  in  their  dwellings,... 

"In  the  yeare  1635.  when  Prelacy  had  so  great  power  that  it 
overtopt  the  tender  plants,  yet  then  I  found  one  Baptist,  who 
declared  so  much  unto  me,  that  I  perceived  in  those  tyrannical 
times  there  was  a  Church  of  Christ  under  his  Ordinances  accorinding 
to  Gospel  manner^ ;  and  why  not  formerly  under  other  persecutors 
also?  for  we  never  read  of  a  total  cutting  oft"  the  Church  of  Christ, 
but  a  wildernesse  estate,  and  how  the  witnesses  shall  prophecy  in 
sackcloth  \_Rev.  11.  3.  J,  which  sets  forth  that  mournful  condition  of 
the  Church  then ;  yet  all  this  while  as  the  word  was  preserved,  so  I 
question  not  but  the  Saints  were  hidden  in  that  measure  whereby 
God  had  alwayes  a  Church  upon  the  Earth,  from  Christ  unto  this 
present;..." 

^  This  sentence  without  doubt  means  that  this  anonymous  (English) 
Anabaptist  in  1635  baptized  his  converts  by  immersion,  or  "dipping". 
Evidently  he  was  an  Arminian,  with  whom  or  whose  converts  the 
Particular  Anabaptists  would  have  nothing  to  do,  when  they  later  adopted 
this  mode  of  baptism.    More  probably,  however,  they  had  not  heard  of  lam. 


END  OF  VOLUME   I. 


cambridqe:  printed  by  john  cijiy,  m.a.  at  the  university  press. 


THE  LIBRARY 


f 


3  1158  00470   1222 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    001  319  819    7 


<-'•-. 


